I'm sure there's been backlash about the "Unfortunate Implications" that men (widowed fathers withstanding of course) can't raise children in the absence of women. It just seems like the gags wouldn't fly that well in today's political climate.
shareIt wasn't just the fact that they were men, but that they were bachelors with a carefree lifestyle suddenly having to act responsibly. Now adays, it could work for men OR women. Hell, a remake would probably work better with young adult women.
And I have the perfect three in mind: Abigail Breslin, Chloe Grace Moretz and Margot Robbie. At least, they're who I'D like to see in a remake.
If it was remade with 3 women, it'd be derided as patriarchal. Women being forced into childcare as if it's their natural and predetermined destiny blah blah blah.
shareIt's a good question. I am sure it could ... but there are a lot of movies that could have been good but they were ruined by something, usually overly-extreme pandering to the younger audience. There is more money and more talent in movies these days than there ever has been and yet the movies are more blah than they ever have been as well. They can't seem to make a movie that is original and the insist on remaking and ruining old classics as well.
shareI don't see why it couldn't be renade today, the world is still full irresponsible men who just want to have a good time.
In fact, I'm surprised Judd Apatow hasn't dragged in his usual crew to do an insufferable remake.
[deleted]
Chris Pratt would be a certainty.
Kevin Hart until recently a good bet.
Nowadays the third father would probably have to be a transgender woman to man. I'm guessing Melissa McCarthy with stubble gets the part.
But then is there something now that you'd have to be a transgender to get the part or you'd get cancelled? Not sure...
It was not just single men who were reluctant to raise a baby at a moment's notice. Peter's girlfriend Rebecca was unwilling to help and also claimed she didn't "know about babies".
share