When You Know Your Friend Is Making a Bad Decision
Hollywood seems determined to turn a profit from remakes and sequels that movie makers have no business organisation writing, producing or releasing. Rather than working hard to generate new films — ones with novel plot devices, leads and stories from underrepresented communities and compelling cinematic visions, for example — the bigwigs of the American moving-picture show industry are on a mission to quickly ruin any remnant of millennial childhood nostalgia.
And so, it is with a heavy heart — and in recognition that January ten, 2021, marks v years since the passing of the admittedly legendary and incomparable David Bowie — that I am forced to address the announcement of a Labyrinth sequel. Now, does the original film require, necessitate or even hint at a sequel? Is the lead actor from the original movie prepared to make an appearance? Is the original director notwithstanding available? The answer to these questions is a single, resounding "NO." And however, here nosotros are. Sigh.
Allow me to take a brief moment to hash out why a Labyrinth sequel is an atrocious, terrible, no-good idea.
A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Will Be a Travesty
The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, it's going to be missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin Rex — a.g.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-bending stone star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His failing health was a well-kept hole-and-corner, and fans and admirers from all over the world mourned his untimely passing.
If you believe that Bowie'southward absenteeism from a Labyrinth sequel is more than a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the unabridged project, I'd recommend that you get dorsum and sentinel the original 1986 motion picture. Bowie's presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and absurd charismatic demeanor — the man also wrote and performed more than half of the movie's soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform as Jareth is much like watching him as Ziggy Stardust. It tin be challenging to split up the truth from the fiction of these performances, as Bowie becomes and so engrossed in his label that he simply ceases to exist himself. Even as an adult, it's difficult to watch Jareth the Goblin Male monarch prance, trip the light fantastic and sing without occasionally stopping to call up, "Wow. That really is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Trip the light fantastic toe the Magic Dance' downwards my hallway."
I'm sorry, simply it's impossible for a casting director to find a multitalented histrion/musician to fill Bowie's shoes in an upcoming sequel. It'due south likewise a challenge to imagine any viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would have of a sudden changed form. This blazon of defoliation only deepens when considering what might become of the Labyrinth'south creatures.
Jim Henson, the mastermind behind the Muppets, directed the original Labyrinth movie. His masterful puppetry showed a depth of skill unmatched by rival puppeteers, and in a time without impressive CGI graphics, he was 1 of the go-to guys for practical special furnishings. Sadly, Henson passed abroad in 1990. Since that time, there take been no less than five theatrical releases with his charming Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.
Some might have those movies as a sign that Henson'due south absenteeism is no big deal when attempting to make a sequel. They would be incredibly wrong. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would be similar a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you dare, 20th Century Fox!) Just terminate thinking most it and capeesh this magic for what it is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth film without using Henson'south puppets would be like George Lucas abandoning applied puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated reckoner graphics. Oh…that's already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown upwardly watching a specific film are bound to experience slighted, misunderstood or just evidently cheated when that moving-picture show ends up lost in technological translation.
Not convinced that fans don't want a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Take a look at how The Lion King fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "live-action"' Disney remake. Here's a spoiler: They didn't like it.
A Projection Fueled by Profits, Not Passions
All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives light-green-lighting so many '80s remakes and sequels right at present?" Unfortunately, the respond lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics take long studied consumer behavior, and it seems that recent studies take not fallen on deaf ears.
In 2014, the Journal of Consumer Enquiry published findings on the connectedness between nostalgia and money-spending habits. They discovered that people are more than willing to spend coin when they're feeling sentimental or nostalgic. Advertisement executives and film producers take taken this tidbit of information and run with information technology.
That's why our electric current moving-picture show industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, especially to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are at present full-fledged adults with existential dread about the time to come as climate modify, pandemics and political chaos exit generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.
But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (think Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the film industry would rather take existing intellectual property and rebrand it for the younger generation. In well-nigh cases, the result is an alienated original audience and a disinterested youth. This is all done in the name of and for the sake of profit.
So Please, Leave This Precious stone of a Film Alone
A flick shouldn't be pre-judged as good or bad, of grade, but should instead exist judged by its merit, reception and lasting impact. Even so, even the most advanced hologram technology could non revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD It). And no corporeality of CGI could replace the authenticity and wonder of Henson's creations.
The simply matter that could remain consistent betwixt the original Labyrinth film and its proposed sequel is its master screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). Only as of this moment, there's no discussion from the aging Brit as to his possible interest in writing a sequel.
As a event, there's little hope that a Labyrinth 2 would be anything more than a shameless, soulless cash grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger earth that lay before them during the '80s. Whatever project based on profit, not passion, is doomed to fail, and that'south why I'm non looking frontwards to the mess of a sequel that undoubtedly lies alee.
Source: https://www.ask.com/entertainment/labyrinth-sequel-bad-idea?utm_content=params%3Ao%3D740004%26ad%3DdirN%26qo%3DserpIndex
0 Response to "When You Know Your Friend Is Making a Bad Decision"
Post a Comment