Naphtali
Practically Family
- Messages
- 767
- Location
- Seeley Lake, Montana
A couple of years ago, I bought the DVD of the remake of "The Manchurian Candidate," starring Denzel Washington. While I'm not enthusiastic about remakes, I figured, "Denzel Washington -- he's like Sean Connery. He can read a phone book aloud and make it seem interesting."
I saw the movie for the first time last night. Appalling! Difficult as it is to imagine, Denzel Washington and the remainder of the fine cast could not rescue the effect of a poor script. Of course, the script could not be well-conceived since the plot (and title) in the original movie, from Richard Condon's compelling novel, depends upon a bogeyman that no longer exists at the time of the remake.
Had the screenwriter been allowed to create a plot in the vein of the original, without being forced into convolution to attempt to mimic what cannot be convincingly mimicked, I suspect the result would have been pretty good. Had it not been titled "The Manchurian Candidate" and marketed as a remake, I would have viewed it with a different mind set. An analogous situation was my take on the 1985 movie, "Young Sherlock Holmes." A different title with different marketing and it would have been okay. In both instances, trying to capitalize on earlier work ruined the subsequent work.
I saw the movie for the first time last night. Appalling! Difficult as it is to imagine, Denzel Washington and the remainder of the fine cast could not rescue the effect of a poor script. Of course, the script could not be well-conceived since the plot (and title) in the original movie, from Richard Condon's compelling novel, depends upon a bogeyman that no longer exists at the time of the remake.
Had the screenwriter been allowed to create a plot in the vein of the original, without being forced into convolution to attempt to mimic what cannot be convincingly mimicked, I suspect the result would have been pretty good. Had it not been titled "The Manchurian Candidate" and marketed as a remake, I would have viewed it with a different mind set. An analogous situation was my take on the 1985 movie, "Young Sherlock Holmes." A different title with different marketing and it would have been okay. In both instances, trying to capitalize on earlier work ruined the subsequent work.
