Patrick Swayze's role will be played by...a woman. :rolleyes:
I guess we can expect two men, or two women, to be the ones dancing together if there's ever a remake of 'Dirty Dancing'. :rolleyes:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mma/ronda-rousey-to-reprise-patrick-swayze%E2%80%99s-role-in-road-house/ar-AAe797Z
I'm a huge Rousey fan. That movie needed a remake bad anyway, and why not do it with the baddest woman on the planet? I like the concept.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRu_5aHZjk8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glCAiJpfAFE
Aw jeez,,,, :rolleyes:, wonder who's gonna replace Elliot,,, maybe one of her sparing partners?
Quote from: Elfie on September 11, 2015, 05:30:16 AM
Aw jeez,,,, :rolleyes:, wonder who's gonna replace Elliot,,, maybe one of her sparing partners?
Hiya, Elfster. I can wait until this hits the 4-movies-for-$5 bin. And then it depends on what else is on the DVD.
Quote from: quiller on September 11, 2015, 05:50:13 AM
Hiya, Elfster. I can wait until this hits the 4-movies-for-$5 bin. And then it depends on what else is on the DVD.
Hiya Quiller,,, ugh I heard that.... one day someone with a brain will start making movies again.....
I'm telling y'all, you're going to like the remake if she has any input on the fight scenes. I complain all the time about it, but one of my biggest problems with movies are the fight scenes. I am just too consumed by the ridiculousness of them that I can't enjoy the movie. Rocky was like that for me. She's been in martial arts since a little girl, and she's the best female fighter in the world, so she (I hope) will bring credibility.
Look at a fight scene like this from Expendables 3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJBWKhddCrU
Don't think she can carry the Swayze role?
Quote from: Elfie on September 11, 2015, 08:27:16 AM
Hiya Quiller,,, ugh I heard that.... one day someone with a brain will start making movies again.....
I have rarely been accused of having such a thing, but you mentioning brain and movies set off this bizarre following rant, so hang on.
You probably didn't see a short-lived sci-fi series out of the UK called
Max Headroom, about a future news-gathering team aided by a computer-generated character who became a sensation and a true hazard for the network which dared to air it. One of their prime topics was the advertising technique they called "blipverts," or subliminally-fast commercials streamed straight into the brain.
The technology exists and the effects are predictable. It's nasty stuff because it does work and you can't escape it, it's over so fast. The only thing different between when this show was produced and today is that even the average home user can get the software to do this very type of production. The pros from downtown are no longer required.
Now crank that up to today's trend toward shorter-is-better. The web is alive with short and medium and even feature-length productions which do use "blipvert" style editing to make their various points. Some of it is spellbinding. But it's not
creative, not in the
content sense. It may be creative in the method of
delivery (net vs. cinema houses, etc.) or camera or processing technology, but that's about it.
What you're talking about is a story that matters, the tale that engages and draws viewers into a special place where they forget real life and real issues for JUST enough time to make it worthwhile.
Today's century-old major movie studios don't take chances. They don't have to, knowing the public will come see their product anyway and it will probably earn more overseas, anyway. Whatever sold last year will still sell next year or beyond, just repackage it a bit and see how the public goes for it.
/bizarre rant
I tuned-in Max Headroom when it was on Cinemax. in the 80's. Not bad. It couldn't capture an audience.
I only saw a snip of Roadhouse. It looked too testosteronically predictable.
Hollywood should combine the two plots for something new.