Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

"High Noon" is going to be remade! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!


Brando4ever

Recommended Posts

2010 the remake of "High Noon" is coming out. I am disgusted by that. They do NOT need to remade Coop's classic film. And a classic in which he won his second well deserved Best Actor Oscar for. I wish the remake would be boycotted. What the heck is Hollywood thinking? Obviously, they've lost their mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it turns out to be a bad movie, it'll likely be a flop and the producers won't recoup their investment. But if it has any artistic merits whatsoever, there's a chance it will also help raise awareness about the original among today's moviegoers. That has arguably already happened with another remake, 3:10 to Yuma.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMGosh!!!! When will TPTB in Tinsel Town ever learn: DON'T MESS WITH THE CLASSICS! They have tried over and over again to remake these classics and they all bomb. I hate to wish anyone bad fortune, but if TPTB are stupid enough to make this film again..then I hope it flops.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's their money, and if they waste it making a huge turkey that is sure to bomb, that's their problem. We should all have learned long ago not to expect current Hollywood honchos not to have too much common sense, much less respect for the classics of the Golden Era.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

How true - their remakes are never as good as the older versions. Look at "Father of the Bride", "The Out of Towners". While I love Steve Martin as a stand up comedian he does not do justice to these films.

 

Who could possible replace Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there somebody with enough guts to make an anti High Noon? Howard Hawks' Rio Bravo

was made because he hated High Noon.He felt that no real Western Sheriff would go around begging for help and then have his bacon saved by his wife. Hawks felt that a real western lawman would have been "good enough"(I think the most common 2 words in a Hawks film) to take care of the sidekicks first, then deal with bad guy Frank Miller alone.

I find it rather ironic that John Wayne accepted Cooper's oscar for High Noon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

Hello, Patrick! I enjoy both movies on their own terms. I never saw any correllation between them until I read a Hawks biography. As for the Oscar irony, Hollywood often makes for "strange bedfellows"!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That year Wayne also accepted John Ford's oscar for The Quiet Man. I consider Oscar's biggest mistake was The Greatest Show on Earth beating out High Noon and The Quiet Man for Best Picture of 1952.I think the Academy members just wanted to give a bone to C.B. DeMille and they probably loathed Republic Studio head Herbert Yates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven?t seen *Rio Bravo* but I do know the basic plot and that Hawk?s and Wayne made it in response to *High Noon*, which they both despised. I don?t care for Wayne?s acting but the plot sounds interesting enough that if you are a fan of Westerns, you would probably enjoy it. However, I?ve got to give the edge to *High Noon* b/c it is not a typical Western and I think that makes it stand out more. I?ve heard a lot of people call *High Noon* an adult Western and I think that is a fitting description. Now that doesn?t mean that kids or young people wouldn?t enjoy it, but that it deals with a mature theme in a more realistic way. I haven?t seen many non-Gary westerns ;), but the typical plot of most is there a good guy and a bad guy who usually have some kind of show down and the good guy practically always wins. Well there?s only so many times you can do that before it gets stale. *Dallas* (1950), one of Gary?s pre *High Noon* westerns is good and one of my faves of his but I?ve read a lot of comments about it being a pretty typical western and not really being very memorable to most people.

 

But then a couple years later you have *High Noon* which stands the western genre on its ear. Here?s a man who?s clearly one of the ?good guys? yet his friends, coworkers, even his new wife turn against him when he needs them the most. We see a man who is strong and brave but who is also hurt and afraid. He?s not a one-dimensional character bravely strutting down the street taking out the bad guys, but a multi-faceted man who must face trouble and try not to get killed in the process.

 

One thing I think the movie did extremely well was showing all the reasons people would not stand by him. His wife is young, somewhat immature and holding onto her idealistic view that one should never fight. Some of the townspeople are just flat out too afraid to fight while others are concerned about how their town will look to outsiders who are considering opening businesses there if they find out there are gunfights down main street. Then you have Helen, Katy Jurado?s character who did a fantastic job. She plays his jilted lover and it?s clear she still cares for him but refuses to help him (she has influence in the town and it?s implied that she could get people to help him) b/c she is still hurt that he left her. All of these characters and their actions lend a realism to the film that it seems most Westerns of that era lacked.

 

Now this isn?t to say that movies like *High Noon* are better than more formulaic movies like *Dallas*. I just think when you have a new twist on an old tale, it makes it unique and stand up better over the long haul.

 

I think the idea of a remake is atrocious. I don?t believe anyone could do a better job than Gary or Katy in those roles. I also don?t like the idea of taking a big star?s most identifiable film and remaking it, no matter who the actor/actress in question may be. They are so identifiable as that character that it?s hard to picture anyone else as that person and the movie dooms itself before it?s even been released.

 

I was looking up a little more info on *Rio Bravo* and the description said a cripple, a drunk and a young gunfighter help the small town sheriff (Wayne). In *High Noon* you have a guy who is a drunk and physically impaired (he?s only got one eye) and then a 14 year old boy who offer to help Will, but he turns them both down b/c he knows the drunk wouldn?t be any help and the boy is too young to fight. It just struck me as funny that Hawks decided to put characters similar to these in his story and have them help Wayne?s character.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too crazy about this idea for myself, but there is the possibility that if it is decently cast and written and is a hit, it will revive interest in the 1952 version.

 

No one can do a better job in this film than Gary Cooper...but a good chunk of the younger audience will never know this unless they actually see High Noon (1952). And the only way they'll see it is if they want to compare it to the remake, which will be as well publicized as 3:10 to Yuma.

 

Clearly a mixed bag...but we'll see what happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Now, now, don't go slashing your wrists or anything over a remake of *HIGH NOON*. Remakes come and remakes go and 99% of the time it's original that's still remembered. After all, it's been remade before, had the plot elements "borrowed" at least hundred times and has been colorized, yet the b/w "Coop" version is alive and well and is still considered the classic version..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noooooooooooooooooooo. Not unless they get Cleavon Little and Gene Wilder.

 

Oh, they already did "Blazing Saddles."

 

Noooooooooooooooooooooo! Just goes to show ya, Hollywood has NO imagination.I can't support it. Arrrrgh...my eyes! My eyes!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...