So the only difference between Jem and Superman is that one was around longer? Sorry, but that's a rather lame excuse.
It isn't lame, it's perfectly valid. Superman has been around since the 1930's and has gone through various iterations in entertainment and there have been some very solid and well-written story arcs that left a major impact on their mediums respectively and are still held in a high regard. Superman has also been studied at university's and there have been books written about the character's cultural impact and the various themes found within the source material. Jem is a different story, it's an 80's property by Hasbro that wasn't exactly a source of extremely high quality writing or animated storytelling( though for it's time the animation was pretty solid and pretty to look at), and that quite a few people write off as a guilty pleasure of theirs in their childhoods. That doesn't mean the movie itself has to be bad, but at best it's going to be a silly and flashy musical made for teens and pre-teens to go gaga at for two hours with a( hopefully) rocking soundtrack. It ain't going to win an Academy Award for best picture, if anything it'll probably win favorite movie at the Kids Choice Awards or the MTV Movie Awards.
Also, was BSG based on better and stronger source material? Many would say the original BSG was cheesy Star Wars rip off. Yet that didn't stop anyone from creating a reboot that was superior to the original. So again that's just another lame excuse.
I've never watched a single episode of Battlestar Galactica, original or remake, so I cannot properly comment on this example. However, a more appropriate example in this case would probably be My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic considering it's also based on a Hasbro property aimed at the female demographic. Before that show came around I don't think the brand was as popular as it is today because of that show. Same said with Transformers, it's now a billion dollar franchise thanks to the movies( with a fourth installment coming out in June with Academy-Award nominee Mark Wahlberg in the lead)that's led to more merchandise being produced.
Furthermore, a director does not have to be a fan of the property in their childhood in order to be interested in a reinvention of said property
That wasn't what I was getting at though, what I was saying is that part of the reason why those critically acclaimed directors took on those properties is because they grew up with them. I'm not saying it is essential for every adaptation for the director to be a fan of the material, in quite a few cases the director isn't the be all or end all of a film production it's more of the producer or company's show.
But not by much.
No, it wasn't but I wouldn't mind getting the Blu-Ray for a rain day, that's more than I can say with the first movie.
2014: The Year of
Godzilla
reply
share