How to Get Away From a Bad Family
Hollywood seems adamant to profit from remakes and sequels that motion picture makers have no business 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 case — the bigwigs of the American film manufacture are on a mission to quickly ruin whatsoever remnant of millennial childhood nostalgia.
So, it is with a heavy heart — and in recognition that January 10, 2021, marks five years since the passing of the absolutely legendary and incomparable David Bowie — that I am forced to accost 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 advent? Is the original managing director still available? The reply to these questions is a unmarried, resounding "NO." And yet, here we are. Sigh.
Allow me to take a brief moment to discuss why a Labyrinth sequel is an awful, terrible, no-skilful idea.
A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Will Be a Travesty
The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, it's going to exist missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin King — a.k.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-bending rock star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His declining wellness was a well-kept secret, and fans and admirers from all over the world mourned his untimely passing.
If you believe that Bowie's absence from a Labyrinth sequel is more a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the unabridged project, I'd recommend that you go dorsum and watch the original 1986 flick. Bowie's presence extends across his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and cool charismatic demeanor — the man also wrote and performed more one-half of the movie's soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform as Jareth is much like watching him every bit Ziggy Stardust. It can be challenging to dissever the truth from the fiction of these performances, equally Bowie becomes and then engrossed in his characterization that he only ceases to be himself. Fifty-fifty as an developed, it's hard to scout Jareth the Goblin King prance, trip the light fantastic toe and sing without occasionally stopping to think, "Wow. That really is David Bowie. And, aye, I will 'Dance the Magic Dance' downward my hallway."
I'yard sorry, but information technology'due south impossible for a casting managing director to observe a multitalented actor/musician to fill Bowie's shoes in an upcoming sequel. It's likewise a challenge to imagine whatsoever feasible reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would have suddenly changed form. This type of defoliation only deepens when considering what might become of the Labyrinth's creatures.
Jim Henson, the mastermind behind the Muppets, directed the original Labyrinth film. His masterful puppetry showed a depth of skill unmatched past rival puppeteers, and in a time without impressive CGI graphics, he was one of the go-to guys for practical special effects. Sadly, Henson passed abroad in 1990. Since that fourth dimension, there have been no less than five theatrical releases with his charming Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.
Some might accept those movies equally a sign that Henson'southward absence is no large deal when attempting to brand a sequel. They would be incredibly incorrect. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would be like a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you dare, 20th Century Trick!) But end thinking nearly it and appreciate this magic for what information technology is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth film without using Henson's puppets would be like George Lucas abandoning applied puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated computer graphics. Oh…that's already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown up watching a specific moving picture are leap to feel slighted, misunderstood or just plain cheated when that motion-picture show ends up lost in technological translation.
Not convinced that fans don't want a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Have a wait at how The Lion King fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "alive-activeness"' Disney remake. Here'south a spoiler: They didn't similar it.
A Project Fueled by Profits, Not Passions
All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives green-lighting so many '80s remakes and sequels right now?" Unfortunately, the answer lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics have long studied consumer behavior, and it seems that recent studies have not fallen on deaf ears.
In 2014, the Journal of Consumer Inquiry published findings on the connectedness between nostalgia and coin-spending habits. They discovered that people are more than willing to spend money when they're feeling sentimental or cornball. Advertising executives and picture show producers have taken this tidbit of information and run with it.
That's why our current picture show industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, especially to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are now full-fledged adults with existential dread nearly the future as climate change, pandemics and political chaos exit generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.
But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (recollect Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the film industry would rather accept existing intellectual property and rebrand it for the younger generation. In most cases, the result is an alienated original audience and a disinterested youth. This is all washed in the name of and for the sake of turn a profit.
So Please, Leave This Precious stone of a Picture Solitary
A picture shouldn't exist pre-judged as practiced or bad, of course, but should instead be judged by its merit, reception and lasting touch on. However, even the about advanced hologram technology could not revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD It). And no amount of CGI could supersede the authenticity and wonder of Henson'due south creations.
The just thing that could remain consistent between the original Labyrinth movie and its proposed sequel is its principal screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). But every bit of this moment, there'southward no discussion from the crumbling Brit as to his possible involvement in writing a sequel.
Equally a result, there'southward fiddling hope that a Labyrinth 2 would be anything more than a shameless, soulless cash grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger world that lay before them during the '80s. Any projection based on turn a profit, not passion, is doomed to fail, and that's why I'one thousand not looking forward to the mess of a sequel that undoubtedly lies ahead.
Source: https://www.ask.com/entertainment/labyrinth-sequel-bad-idea?utm_content=params%3Ao%3D740004%26ad%3DdirN%26qo%3DserpIndex
0 Response to "How to Get Away From a Bad Family"
Post a Comment