and I don't mean the version for TNT...they're doing a new version for theaterical release...with Jennifer Garner...
right now Uncle Felix is smooshing his cheeks and saying "this is not hunky-dunky"
"Wake up John Doe. You're the hope of the world."
Hey, hey, they should leave the Christmas classics alone. Future remakes of A Christmas Carol and Miracle On 34th Street seem inevitable, and there's no need to add Christmas In Connecticut to the list. Ho, ho, ho!
"Each man's life touches so many other lives, and when he isn't around he leaves an awful hole."
Jennifer Garner?! Where does this information come from? Thanks
sharehttp://www.variety.com/article/VR1117959354.html
shareI can't find any info on this remake except for several articles dated 2007, the date of the OP. The latest I can find anything on it is 2009, on the Movie Insider website:
http://www.movieinsider.com/m2767/christmas-in-connecticut/
I'm not usually thrilled about seeing classic old movies being remade into mediocre or dreadful "modern" films; but I'd be all for seeing this one remade: if and only if they cast Martha Stewart in the lead role!
------------------------------------------------
"Oh, well," said Zanoni, "to pour pure water in the muddy well does but disturb the mud!"
I think they are going to have to change an element of the plot which was "old fashioned" even when Barbara Stanwyk was enacting it: a woman marrying a dopey man for no reason at all except that he asks her. And I suppose she needs the money.
That was always the weak part of "Christmas in Connecticut" but it seems to me that if you take that bit of the show out, you are basically left without a show...
I like "Christmas in Connecticut" because I love Christmas movies and anything where a woman earns her money by writing from her home office.
(Not unlike myself.)
Maybe the plot could involve another reason for the main characters needing to hide the fact that the leading lady is unmarried...
A contest for millions of dollars which would pay off her debt?
Flanagan
Garner's not bad but i am very much opposed to a CIC remake.
shareAs long as the Governator's not directing, I might want to see it.
Brother Maynard, bring forth the holy hand grenade!
Awe, I think it would be really exciting to see a remake! I hope it is good though! :)
shareI hope this doesn't go through. I am so tired of Hollywood ruining all these classic old movies that were excellent as they were and don't need any remaking for any reason even just to "update it to present times"...blah. They should be out there coming up with their own new material...I'm sure there are many talented writers out there that have good ideas. I would boycott if they ever tried remaking It's A Wonderful Life...that is about the best classic one of a kind Christmas movie out there and hopefully they won't dare to mess with it.
shareActually, they did a remake of "It's a Wonderful Life" in the late '70's for TV. It starred Marlo Thomas in the "George Baily" role. It was a sad thing to see. I'm not 100% sure of the title, but I think it was called "It Happened One Christmas."
As for Hollywood ruining all of these classic old movies that were excellent, they haven't ruined anything, just as long as the good old original movies are around for us to enjoy.
[deleted]
I hope they aren't remaking CIC. Hollywood keeps remaking the old classics and most of them bomb and they should. I will enjoy the originals much more even if they are in black and white like CIC. Gardner in the Stanwick role,never. She will never see the day she is half as good an actress as Stanwick even in a little movie like this one. Very few today can measure up to the stars of the era this movie was made. They could do drama, comedy, westerns, etc., and be great in each role. Today they are only capable of one type. Put them into something out of their element and the fall flat on their face.
shareTo quote Uncle Felix:
"Is Catistrof!"
No person is completely unnecessary. One can always serve as a bad example - Ruth Bell Graham
If it could be good I'd have no problem but hollywood always ruins the classics. The charm and the innocence of the movie is taken out. That's what I love about old movies.
Life's a cow, milk it for all it's worth.
I'm high on rock and roll!
[deleted]
They already did one HORRID remake in 1992 starring Dyan Cannon. California's governor was the director. I don't think I can watch another remake. I love CIC.... The PERFECT Christmas movie.
shareAnd Kris Kristofferson was in it. I love him, but didn't finish watching it.
I wish they would not remake a film this good. Why not just make something else with Jennifer in it instead of redoing this one? Although, from the point of view of a younger person they might really like an updated version. I know my son did not like Rudolph! Rudolph! How can a little child not like it, but the stop-gap animation did not appeal to him, I guess.
I always liked the way a scraped knee looks on a girl. - Mrs. Harker
If a movies is good, why trash it? And most remakes are garbage.
Someone, I don't recall who, said that only BAD movies should be remade. I agree. It would be a great challenge to improve someone else's weak plot, flimsy character development and sloppy camera work.
I think the same thing about songs!
I always liked the way a scraped knee looks on a girl. - Mrs. Harker
[deleted]
I am not a member of IMDb pro, but if you look up Jennifer Garner's page, she has CIC as "in development". Since I am not a member, I can't look it up and check on its progress. It looks like she intends to go forward with it. As a big fan of the classic, I am not real anxious to see it remade, as most remakes end up as crap.
shareI have three favorite Christmas movies I watch every year: Christmas In Connecticut, Holiday Inn, and The Bishop's Wife. Yes, I have others but these are my must-see faves.
I've never seen the first remake of CIC and don't plan to. I don't plan to watch a second remake, either.
I did see The Preacher's Wife which is a remake of The Bishop's Wife, but frankly, even Denzel Washington couldn't compensate for the self-absorbed Whitney Houston. Did she really have to hog the show with all her singing? The modern twist had nothing on the charming older version. Absolutely nothing.
There's no way a remake of Christmas In Connecticut would overshadow the lovely, playful original. No Stanwyck, no Morgan, no Greenstreet, no Sakall, and none of the other actors who made it memorable and lovable. A remake just won't do for me.
Plus, like a previous poster, I too loved seeing Barbara's character working and writing from home like I do. Sure, the story is dated, but it's still a lot of fun.
I can't think of a single re-make that has had any box office success. I'm sure that this one will flop too. Why do people keep doing these? Just because they like the original and because they possess a lot of money and they HAPPEN to be an actor does not give them license to take over a beloved classic and suddenly make it their own. Who asked them to do this? Did they take a poll?
share
Remakes are done because quite a few of them have been huge box office hits. I'm rather surprised that you can't think of a single remake that had any box office success.
The Wizard of Oz
Father of the Bride
Oceans Eleven
Halloween
The Hills Have Eyes
The Ring
The Departed
King Kong
The Fly
The Thing (1982)
A Star is Born (1954)
Scarface
True Grit
101 Dalmatians
All box office smashes so large that most of the above produced sequels. Whether one actually likes remakes, or not, is another matter entirely, but many remakes have been extraordinarily lucrative.
Some of those may have been box office smashes, but they were not as good as the original. Money and quality are two different things.
I guess it's like looking at clouds. You see one thing and I see another. Peace.
Your comment literally has nothing to do with what I posted.
shareAlso remember that in the early days, audiences of the remake often had no access to the earlier movie. There was no wide-spread use of television until the mid-50s (they were very expensive in the late 40s and early 50s). So the 1954 version of "A Star is Born" would have been new and fresh to an audience of that time.
Now with TCM, DVDs and so on, audiences can watch older movies at will, so the new re-makes will face audiences who have seen the original maybe several times already. Given that premise, it seems less risky to make a movie with an original story line, rather than a remake of an old favorite.
A catastroff indeed. Please tell me Ben Affleck ISN'T going to take Dennis Morgan's role.
share
ben affleck? wtf?When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...
Yes, I guess there have been a few remakes that have made money. However, they are certainly no guarantee of boX office success, especially one for which people really liked the original. For myself and my friends and family who do watch a lot of movies, we have noticed more and more movies have been sequels and remakes, and less and less original ideas coming out. Song writers seem to be able to write new songs every year. I would think that the human brain is capable of endless amounts of creativity, and there are many more books out there that can be adapted to the screen. Instead, we are subjected to lazy writers, actors and studios who are looking for the quick buck, and we are subjected to more and more crap, and left with less and less of interest to view on the weekend at the cinepleX. If they do indeed remake this, I will be giving it a miss until it shows up on my tv set.
To each their own...opinion
The problems with REMAKES they update the story too much. If they remake this they should keep it around the time frame in which the original takes place. This should be the standard rule for all remakes. That's why when they remake horror films its become a cliche that in the updated version that nobody can get "cellphone reception"
share