(Logan's Run) Another Clasic Sci-Fi Remake?

PlaidSquadron · September 7th, 2004, 01:30 PM

I was searching the Internet Movie Database (really just looking up old shows and movies I liked) and I discovered...

Scheduled for 2005 release is a remake of Logan's Run.

I am apalled. Why remake this classic? Wasn't ruining Planet of the Apes enough?

julix · September 7th, 2004, 01:34 PM

It seems as though hollywood is running out of original ideas sometimes to me...It is a shame what happens, they see the built in audience and try to slap something together a lot of times.....it is painful.

ernie90125 · September 7th, 2004, 02:12 PM

Sooner or later one of the 'suits' is going to see where things are going wrong and maybe try something new ! But don't say this too loud or they might not do a Continuation of BSG ! I wish some of the studio would back the right horse !!!

Besides what's wrong with the original Logan's Run ? It is still reasonably with it !

thomas7g · September 7th, 2004, 02:42 PM

Well....it does happen to be produced by Tom DeSanto with Bryan Singer as one of the writers.

julix · September 7th, 2004, 02:52 PM

That brings me to a question...what did you guys think of the storyline Tom was going with?????With Appllo as a cylon and Boxy as Comander....I don't know it real well. Skimmed it on BG.com. I didn't really like what I read, but what about you guys??????

justjackrandom · September 7th, 2004, 03:27 PM

I wasn't crazy about the idea, but it might still have made a great story...we'll probably never know.

As for 'remakes', I don't think it’s a lack of new material as much as a desire on someone's part to revisit the material, particularly if the "original" was an adaptation from another media that wasn’t too faithful.

This isn’t anything new. It’s been going on in Hollywood since the days of silent movies. How many versions of Dumas’ Three Musketeers have been put on film? How many more films are ‘inspired’ by the tale? (At my last count, works in those two categories were upward of 20, with at least half titled The Three Musketeers).

I loved the original Logan's Run, and it has a very special place in my nostalgia banks for a number of reasons...but it wasn’t very true to the book upon which it was based (the short-lived TV series was actually more so). Maybe the new one will be closer.

JJR

shiningstar · September 7th, 2004, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlaidSquadron

I was searching the Internet Movie Database (really just looking up old shows and movies I liked) and I discovered...

Scheduled for 2005 release is a remake of Logan's Run.

I am apalled. Why remake this classic? Wasn't ruining Planet of the Apes enough?

Apparantly NOT

Archangel · September 7th, 2004, 08:12 PM

In this new one, aren't they gonna kick the age to 21 down from 30?

If they are:

Oh, great, another kiddy flick!!!

shiningstar · September 8th, 2004, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archangel

In this new one, aren't they gonna kick the age to 21 down from 30?

If they are:

Oh, great, another kiddy flick!!!

Bummerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

repcisg · September 8th, 2004, 07:35 AM

Archangel · September 8th, 2004, 08:35 AM

Even though it's nice to achieve once in a while...
God, I hate being right!!!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0402344/

shiningstar · September 8th, 2004, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archangel

Even though it's nice to achieve once in a while...
God, I hate being right!!!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0402344/

That's DISGUSTING not YOU ARCHANGEL ...........NOT YOU

Archangel · September 8th, 2004, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiningstar

That's DISGUSTING not YOU ARCHANGEL ...........NOT YOU

I know, Shiningstar. I haven't really seen you insult anyone here yet!

Of course, you never met me either... :laugh:

shiningstar · September 8th, 2004, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archangel

I know, Shiningstar. I haven't really seen you insult anyone here yet!

Of course, you never met me either... <img src=http://thomas7g.com/battlestar-galactica/smilies/colonial-laugh.gif>

You can be 'that' bad if you can make me laugh

Archangel · September 8th, 2004, 12:54 PM

I *can* be, huh

:laugh:

justjackrandom · September 8th, 2004, 02:11 PM

A good primer on Logan’s Run and its various guises can be found at:

http://www.stellar-database.com/non-...n.html#what_is

JJR

Archangel · September 8th, 2004, 02:37 PM

Thanks for linking that JJR. It was informative

PlaidSquadron · September 8th, 2004, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justjackrandom

A good primer on Logan’s Run and its various guises can be found at:

http://www.stellar-database.com/non-...n.html#what_is

JJR

You know, after reading this web site, I may have to retract my comments that started this thread. Apparently, the belief is the movie being made now may be closer to the sourse material then the Michal York version. Since one of my other pet Hollywood Peeves is how often good books get screwed up in translation, this might turn out OK.

But then again, Logan could be "reimagined" into a woman....

thomas7g · September 8th, 2004, 04:38 PM

I'm not exactly sure why everyone is so angry that the age limit has been changed.

The first film looked down at a youth based culture. The whole idea was that it was a waste to end life at 30. It saw a quality in growing old. Bringing the age limit down doesn't make it a kiddy flick necessarily. It will still still make a point that these "kids" are wasting so much of their lives by valuing only the first 21 years of their youth. That's the whole point of Logan's Run. That your life has previous value past your youth.

I also think that our culture has changed significantly. MTV has made kids REALLY emphasize youth. They consider themselves as full cocky "I know it all" adults alot sooner than we did. It has placed an importance on being a young adult to the point where 30 seems very old. So a carousel at 30 doesn't have the impact it did when we were young.

To our young 30 seems incredibly far away. Many think that they will be lucky to live past 30. Most are definitely not thinking that far ahead. And for this kind of film to work, you need to feel that the immediacy that the characters in Logan's Run aren't living a full life.

shiningstar · September 8th, 2004, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlaidSquadron

You know, after reading this web site, I may have to retract my comments that started this thread. Apparently, the belief is the movie being made now may be closer to the sourse material then the Michal York version. Since one of my other pet Hollywood Peeves is how often good books get screwed up in translation, this might turn out OK.

But then again, Logan could be "reimagined" into a woman....

Or a spy

Sci-Fi · September 8th, 2004, 08:20 PM

Just to comment on the 21 vs 30 age debate. It makes sense for the 30 limit. Think about it. If you have kids at 13, when you become 21, your kids would be only 8 years old. The computers that control society would have their hands full trying to keep things under control.

In the original film, Logan takes an ankh symbol off a runner he just killed and the main computers added 4 years to Logan's life so he appears to have turned 30 and was ordered to go undercover and find "Sanctuary". So if the new film follows that, Logan would be 16. One could also wonder why doesn't teenagers defy authority and tradition and go look for Sanctuary just for kicks or out of curiosity. It's only natural for each generation to push the limits or try new things. There will always be one in the group that will try. Anyways, wonder if the new film will have the women wear those micro mini skirts as in the original film....

justjackrandom · September 9th, 2004, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sci-Fi

Just to comment on the 21 vs 30 age debate. It makes sense for the 30 limit. Think about it. If you have kids at 13, when you become 21, your kids would be only 8 years old. The computers that control society would have their hands full trying to keep things under control.

They don't have children. The kids are grown in vitro and raised by the community and the computer. I don't remember it being established whether they are clones or not.

I think they changed the ages so they could cast older actors. As for a remake, I am looking forward to seeing if they come closer to the book. I still love the original film, but a new treatment doesn't bother me.

JJR

repcisg · September 9th, 2004, 09:29 AM

Go Logan, Go!

September 9th, 2004, 11:09 AM

I really get a kick out of "Logan's Run." Before Star Wars came out a year later in 1977, Logan's Run was the final word in big budget Hollywood Sci Fi. I watched this flick on my 30th birthday. I am the first to shake my fist in dismay at the "powers that be" when the stench of re-imagining fouls the air. But I understand that the idea behind this new take on Logan is that it will be faithful to the original novel. I can kind of be behind this. There is no way that you could recapture the flavor of the original movie. Peter Ustinov is gone and the story was pretty well rapped up in the movie. If the new movie is good, fans of the original book will be pleased. If the movie rots, at least it will get the studio to release the 13 episode Logan's Run TV series on DVD. You know it will happen as a promotional tie in. This can be a win-win sceanario. Either way, fans of Logan's Run will get something they want. I would buy the DVD set on the day it becomes available. Rem is my favorite character from this series. l

September 9th, 2004, 05:24 PM

I loved the original Logan's Run and still see it when it appears on cable from time to time. I enjoyed the series as a kid but it was a long time ago so wonder now how good it really was. I am hoping for a good remake but with the recent horrible remake of Planet of the Apes, which I looked forward to at the time still fresh in mind I am not getting my hopes up.

I think changing the age from 30 to 21 may be a non-issue. When's the last time we ever saw real teenagers play teenagers in a major movie anyway? I wonder how old the actor playing a 16 year old Logan will actually be?

On the question earlier about the Desanto Battlestar project: I was not happy about what I read especially the Apollo and Boxey situation. If the movie was made however I would still be looking forward to seeing it. I simply think there are a lot of better ideas for a continuation out there.

julix · September 9th, 2004, 06:25 PM

I agree antelope, I have seen some better continuation ideas as well.....

shiningstar · September 9th, 2004, 06:33 PM

I have to agree with that Antelope. By the way I haven't seen you in awhile welcome home.

They've also mucked up the remake series of dark shadows and lost in space too.

ernie90125 · September 10th, 2004, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Bringing the age limit down doesn't make it a kiddy flick necessarily.

On this I will have to disagree with you Thomas, bringing the age limit down to 21 does make it a kiddy flick, as all the actors needed to portray the characters will be under 21.

I agree with Antelope's point about the BSG continuation, I didn't like the Boxey and Apollo developments.

I don't think Starbuck would have let someone he has seen a as child beat him to command. I don't think Boxey would have the experience to command effectively either.

And we have already seen a 'Father as the bad guy', and 'Son as the good guy' movie, it's called Star Wars ! And don't let there be more BSG against Star Wars arguments !

thomas7g · September 10th, 2004, 03:41 AM

Quote:

On this I will have to disagree with you Thomas, bringing the age limit down to 21 does make it a kiddy flick, as all the actors needed to portray the characters will be under 21.

Usually teens are played by actors in their twenties. Look at how long Michael J Fox, Ralph Macchio and Mathew Broderick played "kids".

From what I've seen there has been a ton of films were the main character was a teenager that were perfectly suited to adults. Back to the Future for one. Same with Karate Kid. And well... the Exorcist was hardly a kiddie flick though it starred a very young girl.

THis film is being produced by Tom DeSanto and written by Brian Singer. Two names that have been closely connected to the revival of Battlestar Galactica. So for me its a matter of do you trust these guys to produce a film we will like. Do they feel how we feel about making films? Are they a team we can trust? Or are they just like every studio exec and is out for a buck and going to make a crappy film just to hit a demographic?

Sofar they have produced films that appeal to the kid in us without making another Spy Kids. XMEN for example.

WE as a fanbase have always made the selfish claim that these guys need to appeal to US when remaking Galactica. But what have we given THEM to earn anything at all? Where is the loyalty? The faith? Or the trust?

I will say one thing. Knock down DeSanto hard enough, and our hopes may go out the window for a continuation.

For me I think its most definitely worth it to keep an open mind for DeSanto. And give him my best wishes. And hope his films succeed.

ernie90125 · September 10th, 2004, 05:47 AM

Quote:

From what I've seen there has been a ton of films were the main character was a teenager that were perfectly suited to adults. Back to the Future for one.

I agree that there are films like this, and I also agree that Back to the Future is one of them, and it is an excellent film ! However, these are incomparable to Logun's Run, as ALL the characters will be under 21. There will be no Doc Brown, a mature character to make wise comments.

If by your latter comments you think I wish a DeSanto movie to fail, please don't think that as I don't want him to fail, as that could jeopodise Transformers and BSG being made. I don't want to knock DeSanto at all, just express concern that Logun's Run will end up becoming another Thunderbirds.