Sep
17
2019

This Princess Bride thing is just a troll.

It’s a throwaway line from a Variety puff piece trying to explain, among other reasons, why CBS picked up and revived an IP (the One Day at a Time remake) that Netflix canned after three seasons because not enough people were watching it. Which CBS can do! I don’t watch network TV and I don’t have cable and I didn’t care if that show was on Netflix or not. But the Princess Bride thing was, like, one sentence in it.

I don’t have to explain to anybody reading this why remaking The Princess Bride is a bad idea. Including, honestly, Hollywood. They already know.

10 Comments

  • JustDave says:

    Well, the big problem with any One Day at a Time remake is it would of a necessity have a critical lack of teenage Valerie Bertinelli.

    • acat says:

      While a lack of Bertinelli would be a major flaw, it’d also be missing Pat Harrington’s snide Snyder ..
      .
      I could see making a remake fly .. although I suspect the current remake is going too broad in its’ “appeal to everyone” .. illegals and lesbians and PTSD and drugs/booze, oh my! ..
      .
      Pick *one* issue .. and follow it. Don’t chase the zeitgeist, let it come to you.
      .
      Mew

      • acat says:

        As for a remake of Princess Bride .. just no.
        .
        Mew

      • Luke says:

        First, they’d have to buck the zeitgeist surrounding white working class people.

        • acat says:

          .. since there’s huge money available to those who do just that .. Roseanne turned a cast of near-nobodies into .. somebodies .. I don’t see why it couldn’t be done again.
          .
          The tricky part is going to be the generational jump .. showing that Millennial single-mom-with-two-kids-from-different-dads-both-of-whom-have-other-kids-from-other-mothers families are .. not optimal .. without the whole “haha, xe said Millennial” schtick.
          .
          Mew

  • Aetius451AD says:

    You know, this is actually an interesting thoughts. They could not improve or even equal it, obviously. Nor even manage to make anything new and enjoyable. However, how many different ways could they screw it up?
    .
    All of them. I cannot think of a single character in the movie who does not own the part, lock, stock and barrel.
    Maybe… the old queen? The old King is awesome: ‘Won’t that be nice!’ She pretty much just has ‘A very ‘strange’ wedding!’

  • Luke says:

    Committees combine the stupidity of members to override the individual competence of the people who comprise it.
    Self-selected communities are even worse.
    Hollywood has actively been selecting for leftist sympathies and decadent proclivities in preference to competence for many decades. (See also: Woody Allen.)
    Hollywood dearly loves subverting things outside its collective groupthink. (Like suburbs. Or Starship Troopers.)
    .
    That was a trial balloon.
    Kill it with fire.

RSS feed for comments on this post.



Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com