Gone with the Wind
question
Remake of the movie Gone with the Wind
Mrsbooks
(last edited
Nov 10, 2014 06:35PM
)
Aug 09, 2013 07:54AM
You know I'm really surprised by the lack of interest in a remake of this movie. The number 1 negative comment I hear about it is "It would ruin the first one." OR "Nothing could ever compete with the first one, they would butcher it", OR "if it's not broke; don't fix it", etc"
I don't know how exactly remaking a movie could ruin the first movie because a remake doesn't have anything to do with the last movie, since it's a new movie. The old one is ALWAYS THE SAME whether a new one is made or not. A new movie, even if it sucked, could NEVER ruin the story, or the old movie of Gone with the Wind. I think it's sort of stupid to say it would as the statement doesn't actually make any sense. It's also not to fix the old version, if the old version needed fixing they'd have taken THAT and fixed it. A remake is a new version all on it's own.
I'm beginning to wonder if people know what a remake is lol.
We see so many different versions of Pride & Prejudice, Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, movies based on Dickens, etc. Should they have stopped after they just made it the one time? Or what about when they made a version that was liked the most?
As for nothing ever comparing to the old one, this statement would probably be true. This version was done magnificently. Although difficult to imagine, who knows a new one might be just as good if not better (although doubtful). There is so much to the story, to the novel that never made it into that 3 hour movie. Maybe a mini-series would be nice?
I would love to see an attempt at remaking this amazing story. Although I'm doubtful it could top how good the first movie was I still think it's worth a try.
I guess my question is, who would be interested in seeing a remake?
I don't know how exactly remaking a movie could ruin the first movie because a remake doesn't have anything to do with the last movie, since it's a new movie. The old one is ALWAYS THE SAME whether a new one is made or not. A new movie, even if it sucked, could NEVER ruin the story, or the old movie of Gone with the Wind. I think it's sort of stupid to say it would as the statement doesn't actually make any sense. It's also not to fix the old version, if the old version needed fixing they'd have taken THAT and fixed it. A remake is a new version all on it's own.
I'm beginning to wonder if people know what a remake is lol.
We see so many different versions of Pride & Prejudice, Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, movies based on Dickens, etc. Should they have stopped after they just made it the one time? Or what about when they made a version that was liked the most?
As for nothing ever comparing to the old one, this statement would probably be true. This version was done magnificently. Although difficult to imagine, who knows a new one might be just as good if not better (although doubtful). There is so much to the story, to the novel that never made it into that 3 hour movie. Maybe a mini-series would be nice?
I would love to see an attempt at remaking this amazing story. Although I'm doubtful it could top how good the first movie was I still think it's worth a try.
I guess my question is, who would be interested in seeing a remake?
reply
flag
No. Sorry, but that's just about the worst idea I've ever heard. Next thing we know, some idiot is going to suggest a remake of Casablanca! Just leave it alone...
Some things just need to be left alone. Somehow the 1939 movie had all of the perfect elements to make the movie what it was. That movie put more butts in seats than even the billion dollar grossers we have today. My hope is that it is one of the few films which is seen as perfect just the way it is without the update. And no one can convince me that there is an actor out there better suited to play Rhett Butler than Clark Gable... No one.
Gone with the Wind wasn't a movie so much as a movement. The novel had swept the country which, at that time, was still pretty divided between the North and the South. Many in the South, including Margaret Mitchell, didn't know until they were in their twenties, that the South had lost the Civil War, which was still called 'The War of Northern Aggression.' The entire country wept for the war dead, kept alive by the more recent memories of the losses of World War I. In short, the country went to the movie to weep for things that were fresh in memory.
When the news came out that the book would become a film there was no doubt that Clark Gable would be Rhett Butler. He was dashing, devilish, and undeniably a star. It was not possible to read the book without putting Clark Gable's face on the page every time you read the words 'Rhett Butler.'
I don't believe the American public is holding out for another visit to the South. The country is divided now more than at any time since the Civil War, no one believes that we should be nostalgic for the good old days when Republicans and Democrats were polite to each other or when fraternity boys and sorority girls whooped at balls and said they were off to do their duty. In fact, most of the country now feels no sense of personal duty to the country at all so there is nothing to be nostalgic about.
I think we'd be better off with a remake of The Da Vinci Code.
My 2 cents
jack
Author of the French Letters series
When the news came out that the book would become a film there was no doubt that Clark Gable would be Rhett Butler. He was dashing, devilish, and undeniably a star. It was not possible to read the book without putting Clark Gable's face on the page every time you read the words 'Rhett Butler.'
I don't believe the American public is holding out for another visit to the South. The country is divided now more than at any time since the Civil War, no one believes that we should be nostalgic for the good old days when Republicans and Democrats were polite to each other or when fraternity boys and sorority girls whooped at balls and said they were off to do their duty. In fact, most of the country now feels no sense of personal duty to the country at all so there is nothing to be nostalgic about.
I think we'd be better off with a remake of The Da Vinci Code.
My 2 cents
jack
Author of the French Letters series
No, I don't want to see a remake. What is the point of remaking something if you can't make it better than the original?
Everything is remade nowadays! I'm pretty convinced that screenwriters just don't have any new ideas, so they have to fall back on what worked in the past. It irks me everytime!
When something has been done that well, what would be the point?
I love the original movie and I can somewhat forgive its glorification of plantation days and how slavery wasn't really all that bad and sympathy for the South that had its glory days stolen from them, ignoring what those days were built on.
I don't think I could forgive a contemporary remake of this book-the problems would be too glaring. This is not a time to be nostalgic for slavery and its benefits to white people.
I don't think I could forgive a contemporary remake of this book-the problems would be too glaring. This is not a time to be nostalgic for slavery and its benefits to white people.
I love Gone with the Wind. I have read it several times and watched the movie more times than I can count since my Grandmother introduced me to it. I did a book report on it in highschool. I would still be interested in a remake IF the right actors and actresses can be found. Maybe this time it will be a little closer to the book. Scarlett had children by all 3 of her husbands. And I agree that a remake might get more interest in the original.. I always find an original when I find a remake.
The 1939 movie was perfect, so WHY is a remake necessary?
Everyone knows the old saying “if it ain't broke don't fix it”. I'd hate to see what today's directors would come up with, not to mention the screenwriters. It scares me to think what a remake would do to the original. Please leave it alone!
I watched and read the sequel “Scarlett” and was not impressed. So leave Gone With the Wind alone. You just can't improve on perfection!
That's just my opinion.
I watched and read the sequel “Scarlett” and was not impressed. So leave Gone With the Wind alone. You just can't improve on perfection!
That's just my opinion.
Oh, no. Why do they want to ruin everything that's already perfect?
There is no need for a remake. You can't beat PERFECTION!!!! There is nothing stopping the new generations watching it, but who'd have the attention span for a 3hr+ movie and how many can watch something that doesn't have any special effects?
I'd watch it, but out of pure curiosity. I don't honestly think it could be better than the 1939 film - I just don't know who could play Rhett Butler like Clark Gable did. Would it be a remake of the film though - or another adaptation of the book? I mean, I don't think of the various Pride and Prejudice adaptations as remakes of earlier films, I think of them as adaptations of the novel.
This is one of my all time favorite movies. I was watching it a few years back when my daughter came downstairs and joined me. She was so mesmerized that it boggled my mind since the costumes were old and dialogue in the movie isn't present day dialogue. In my opinion I don't think they would remake it because of the content even though it is part of our history. Would be interesting to see who they would pick as the lead characters because we all know that Vivian Leigh and Clark Gable would be hard to replace.
Honestly, this was the first book I finished that wasn't less than 100 pages, I was 11. The reason? The movie. I'm in the if it's not broken don't fix it group, this movie spawned a lifetime of reading. Hard to think it could be improved upon, it's not a special effects novel and it couldn't be more beautifully acted or filmed.
I think Hugh Jackman could be a great Rhett Butler! As perfect as the original was, it would still be fun to see a remake. It might not live up to the original, but, who knows? It would be fun to compare and contrast the two. Now, as to Scarlett OHara . . . .
No. No. NO! Best movie ever made. Leave it alone, along with Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, and It's A Wonderful Life. No reason to remake such treasures except to exploit them.
I just saw the movie again, it really doesn't need to be re-made.
The other horrific side of remaking this wonderful movie is that it would all be "enhanced" with cgi effects. There would be no heat from the fire, which was real in the movie, they actually burned down things, the backgrounds and estates would be enhanced, and probably half of the gorgeous landscape would too, especially after the ravages of war.
I wouldn't mind a "Gone With The Wind" remake, as long as they don't pick unsuitable actors/actresses. I do think it would be hard to replace Clark Gable or Vivien Leigh, but it isn't impossible. Look how many remakes there are for movies such as "Jane Eyre" or "Pride and Prejudice". If they did make a remake, I would hope they included all the kids she had this time instead of just Bonnie.
Remaking "Gone With The Wind" is like repainting a Rembrandt. You can't improve on a Masterpiece!
I think a remake would bring this fantastic story to a whole new audience.
How many of us replying have actually read the book? Honestly, in my mind, GWTW has not even been made into a movie yet, there was so much missing from the novel. What we are talking about is something else entirely, something that only bears a resemblance to the famous story by Margaret Mitchell.
I am wondering how much it has to do with the controversy around the tale. Maybe nobody wants to touch it because it would cost so much AND be scrutinized so closely, in more ways than one.
I am wondering how much it has to do with the controversy around the tale. Maybe nobody wants to touch it because it would cost so much AND be scrutinized so closely, in more ways than one.
What is all this sentimental BS about how perfect the movie Gone With The Wind was ? The cast looked the part - yes. However the acting was horrible - over dramatic & unrealistic . Typical for the day , but not for current day- can you imagine someone in real life having a conversation like Scarlett did with Ashley ? Get real people . And the sets were so fake, it was ridiculous . If it was redone today, the special effects would be amazing - not with a backdrop of Scarlett come back to TARA with a scenery painting that wouldn't be good enough forms high school play.
Let's face it - everyone thinks that movies like Gone with the Wind , Casablanca , the Wizard of Oz etc. , were so perfect because the actors that were beloved are dead & gone, & they were the very first to make epic movies - ever .
But let's be realistic , set aside sentimentality , & push for remakes of the wonderful books - the actual stories themselves. - remember it's the stories that are classic , not the old movies.
Don't compare the books with the movies . The story itself was the original creation of the author - the movie is some directors interpretation of that original creation.
Let's face it - everyone thinks that movies like Gone with the Wind , Casablanca , the Wizard of Oz etc. , were so perfect because the actors that were beloved are dead & gone, & they were the very first to make epic movies - ever .
But let's be realistic , set aside sentimentality , & push for remakes of the wonderful books - the actual stories themselves. - remember it's the stories that are classic , not the old movies.
Don't compare the books with the movies . The story itself was the original creation of the author - the movie is some directors interpretation of that original creation.
Given attempts at exact remakes of iconic classics don't do well, I would rather see a GWTW inspired remake of an update version instead. They seem to do better. There will be no replacing original actors, scenes, faces, etc. (think Hitchcock's Psycho). Mind you, I LOVE Hugh Jackman but I can see a version set in a slightly different time, not necessary the most recent year, with slightly modern aspects of the storyline with Luke Evans as Rhett and Juno Temple as Scarlett. Juno with dark hair, can even look a lot like Scarlett. I see the rugged sexiness in Luke Evans and the sassy southern belle in Juno. Take them away from the hoop skirts and bump them up a little and we can have a revamped story for a new era. It's a classic love struggle that exists between men, women, gender roles and social situations no matter how modern we are.
deleted member
Aug 14, 2013 11:14AM
0 votes
Mrsbooks wrote: "You know I'm really surprised by the lack of interest in a remake of this movie. The number 1 negative comment I hear about it is "It would ruin the first one." OR "Nothing could ever compete with ..."
There's only one Clark Gable. They'd have to search the world. Someone else can play Scarlett, okay. It'd be hard as hell to find a man who's that masculine and gentle at the same time. Men don't come like that anymore. Men can't speak naturally and say so many good things like that anymore.
Even Leo sucked in The Great Gatsby (from my perspective.) There was nothing natural about his "old sport" cries. For me, it didn't work in authenticity.
Replacing Gable is like finding someone to play Ava Gardner for "The Aviator" movie. The real people had too much soul. They were too real, too natural and too talented to be replaced by today's stars who just don't have those epic looks. Today's stars can be pretty but in a shallow way. They are missing dimensions. Just because technology can produce better effects and in some cases, more interesting films, that has nothing to do with the fact that it's players suck right now.
There's only one Clark Gable. They'd have to search the world. Someone else can play Scarlett, okay. It'd be hard as hell to find a man who's that masculine and gentle at the same time. Men don't come like that anymore. Men can't speak naturally and say so many good things like that anymore.
Even Leo sucked in The Great Gatsby (from my perspective.) There was nothing natural about his "old sport" cries. For me, it didn't work in authenticity.
Replacing Gable is like finding someone to play Ava Gardner for "The Aviator" movie. The real people had too much soul. They were too real, too natural and too talented to be replaced by today's stars who just don't have those epic looks. Today's stars can be pretty but in a shallow way. They are missing dimensions. Just because technology can produce better effects and in some cases, more interesting films, that has nothing to do with the fact that it's players suck right now.
Personally I would love to see a remake of Gone with the Wind. Maybe remake is not the right word- more of a separate thing entirely. I think a 10 hour mini series that followed the book from start to finish would be amazing. Not with the goal of outshining Clark and Vivien (they were perfect for the three hour version) , but with the goal of following the book more closely.
I am never a fan of re-makes. Perhaps if, as a previous commentator says, they did a mini-series that was exactly true to the book it might work. Personally though I am happy with what the epic we already have.
I would love to see a remake of this movie, but only if it is going to be even better than the old one. If we could have an even better version, then why not? But if it's not going to be better, then no thanks.
I don't think they would do a remake because of all the costumes and things would cost to much. Hollywood thinks that all people like are action films full of shooting, blowing things up and cgi type stuff. I would be interested to see a remake, but love the original!
So should we just also rewrite books too? How about repainting the Mona Lisa or Guernica?
The test is, what films would one not remake? And why?
Is there any realistic chance of making a far better or more ultimately great movie when making such a decision.
Or is one just setting up for failure because of unrealistic expectations?
The test is, what films would one not remake? And why?
Is there any realistic chance of making a far better or more ultimately great movie when making such a decision.
Or is one just setting up for failure because of unrealistic expectations?
I just think that Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh have SO become & so embodied Rhett and Scarlett that it would be extremely intimidating and risky to try and peg new actors in those roles and expect them not to be constantly compared to the old one. It would be interesting to see; personally I have no clue who could possibly portray Rhett half as well as Clark Gable. Or Scarlett, for that matter.
I thought the movie was horrible compared to the book and would be all for a remake. With the film industry coming a long way since 1939 I think it would be a great idea to use the new technology in order to really bring this story to life!
deleted member
Aug 27, 2013 06:10PM
0 votes
Most of today's Hollywood actors and actresses don't have enough class to pull it off. They don't know how to act like real ladies and gentlemen without something seeming fake or off. The majority of screen writers don't know how to write anymore - they would butcher the dialogue and it would come out cheesey. The director would probably decide it needed more action and add some kind of scene where Rhett fights someone and spend a good twenty minutes of screen time on that at the expense of character development. I cringe to think what the end result would be. But the bottom line is there are so many people who see the book as racially charged that I don't see anyone even attempting a remake.
I think some movies should be left alone. One perfect version that everyone know is enough. Clark and Vivian were (in my opinion) perfect for the roles and I don't know anyone who would do better. The new movie would be or to modern, or with to much effects, because that is how they make them now (remakes). I like some remakes (Narnia for example), but that is fantasy and you can do whatever you want. In this story.. I don't think so.
I thought about it for a while and can't say I would like a remake of Gone with the Wind because Cable & Vivien, and Hollywood's way of bringing Atlanta to life was amazing for its time. Then I thought, maybe I'm too big of a fan of the movie, not to mention the book to be objective in my selection so I asked my husband (who doesn't like to read) but saw the movie who he would choose to replace Rhett. His answer was Pierce Brosman. A cold "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn. " from Pierce might be something interesting to see.
Part of the charm of the movie is the memory of the movie and all the history with it and since then. No point remaking.
I like the idea of a new audience being introduced to the story...and hopefully they'd watch the original after their interest is caught!
Nope. Not this girl, sorry. There's already a good movie out, so why remake it? Besides, it's only people like us who appreciate the book; a remake of the movie would most likely go straight to dvd.
deleted member
Aug 13, 2013 07:38AM
-1 votes
I think we would all prefer the old one, but the new one would probably be good too.
That is, if the producers/directors aren't crappy.
There are some stellar remakes, such as Alice in Wonderland, LOTR, Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, Anne of Green Gables, etc.
That is, if the producers/directors aren't crappy.
There are some stellar remakes, such as Alice in Wonderland, LOTR, Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, Anne of Green Gables, etc.
Adam Stuhlman
A remake might be good, but it has to be made through a historical lens and without romanticizing the Confederacy or slavery, which happens ad nauseam
...more
· flag
· flag
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Gone with the Wind (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Virginia's War (other topics)Gone with the Wind (other topics)
