Most of us love the movie and the book, or we would not be on this board. My question is simple. Now that things have changed in society, should this movie be remade and actually follow the book? No matter what your answer, why and why not, and please add if you loved the book or the movie more. Thank you ahead of time.
Let's all kiss and make up, after you find the mouthwash.
Speaking only for myself, of course, I don't understand why it's so important to keep remaking films! If it was good the first time around, don't you think it's kind of an insult to the first one and all the hard work done on it, to turn around and remake it? It's not like this movie was a science fiction movie that a remake could employ better, more modern special effects. THAT, I can see the logic in remakes for. But something like this? No way. Like someone else has already said, it was just right the first time around.
I say, don't mess with what works!
I agree with what most people here are saying - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. No matter what the format, be it tv show or a film, just take a look at what airs now, and the competition it would be up against. The whole thing that drew me into the film was its slow lazy pace that spanned a few decades. Not much actually happens in it besides the murder in terms of plot. Which is what makes it fantastic.
I also would be a bit fearful of how Idgie/Ruth would be portrayed. I think it would be used as a selling-point and be a bit gratuitous in order to keep up with modern depictions of lesbianism. If I wanted to see that I'd watch the L Word, all sex and not much else.
So yeah, I can't see a remake happening anyway. The 1990s are rather recent.
I agree--leave it alone. Remakes are rarely successful.
shareI loved the book and movie. But I also thought it to could have focused more on Evelyn's marriage and delved more into the characters. In the movie as you can see there are many questions about Idgie and Ruth's realationship and in the book it is clear that early on Idgie has a crush and then is in love with Ruth. I do believe the movie followed pretty closely to book but, there are parts I wonder why they left out. I also wonder why Avnet went with the mystery of are Ninny and Idgie the same person something else that is very clear in the book. If they did do a remake I would watch it. I am not sure how well it would do since it would always be compared to the original and to me Ninny is always going to be Jessica Tandy ,Mary Stuart Masterson as Idgie and so on. As for the movie and the feelings between Ruth and Idgie as good as the movie was sometimes you cant put to film what a writer has written someones thinking and feeling to be. But the movie did a great job of showing it. Now I am curious if a remake will happen and we will more of the people in Whistlestop.
shareJust to be clear: it a tv-series would be made(and if it is done properly), it would not be a remake of the film, which is in itself very good. It would just be another adaption of the book.
I just want to see more of Evlyns marriage, how low and suicidal she feels, I want to see more of Big Georges family: his wife and kids, I would LOVE to see Ninny, Cleo and Albert in the flash backs, and most importantly: a truer description of the relationship between Ruth and Idgie (which is nicly done in the film, don't get me wrong, but still...). That does not mean I want to see any sex, sex was not even there in the book. I just want to hear them say I love you to each others.
**********
- Who's the lady with the log?
- We call her the Log Lady.
NO it has not to be re-done. Not today and not in 30 yrs.
If you do another movie do something else, completly different in a unique way. I hate this whole copying / updating / covering /re-sampling. No matter movie or music. A copy is never better than the original. And the blame of uncreativity goes to you.
That's why Michael Jackson is Michael Jackson and Weird Al Yankowic is Weird Al Yankowic. People rooting for copycats and remakes and covers need help in my opinion. It's also no flattering to the original. I think if merely unoriginal and lack of creativity and just an opportunity to make a quick buck on one's own with little effort. RESPECT THE ART. T Y
I agree. I am not at all a fan of movie remakes, although remakes of some songs have been very successful.
shareBut as I've said before, this won't be a movie remake - it would be another adaption of the book - which is different.
**********
- Who's the lady with the log?
- We call her the Log Lady.
But why do you feel it would be a good adaptation? The book is difficult to adapt which is why the Avnet screenplay has the issues it does (which as a fan of the book I am naturally bothered by, but they don't really dampen my enjoyment of the film).
Adapting books to screen is really, really difficult. Doing so with a book written from a third-person omniscient narration is even more difficult. There would be discontent and concerns among fans of both the book and the Avnet film about how any new adaptation would treat the material - how much to focus on the lesbian relationship, how much to focus on the racial element, casting decisions, etc. Given how political the world has become in the past 2 decades it would seem likely that no matter how sensitively the material was reworked it would cause offence to some group or other.
As others have said, what would be gained by a new adaptation to offset such concerns? A more faithful adaptation? That doesn't seem entirely likely. A more modern treatment of the material? It would be at odds with the setting (spanning from 1930s to 1980s). The main thrust to the arguments for a new adaptation seems to be a more thorough adaptation, covering additional stories. I have to admit I like that idea but then I realise that most of the material left out in the Avnet screenplay is also likely to be the most politically sensitive material. I just don't know who could take on such a work and have it remain faithful to the book.
I agree! There's so much out there to do so why be lazy and unoriginal and do remakes?
shareI don't think they should. This movie was made very well, and the subtlty of their relationship is part if the charm. If it was remade now it would be more sexual, which is unecessary. Even in the book the most graphic mention of anything sexual was a kiss. I enjoyed both equally.
shareIt's interesting that a lot of people would like a mini-series, whether they want a movie remake or not. I think we love the characters deeply and want to know more about them, which a miniseries would have the freedom to give us.
Seems like a good fit for Bravo to produce.
Is ever the right time to redo anything? I say never. To me it is akin to a redo of a Picasso painting. What about a Pollock painting? What about any Hitchcock film? Casablanca? To Kill A Mockingbird, really...really? Let's copy New York City. You can't really redo anything now can you? It was done in a time in our culture with the attitudes and perspectives and technology of that time. The movie is a representation of that time. All forms of art are born out of the artists' experiences of that time. There were many artists that made up the result of the greatness of that movie. "The secret's in the sauce."
In almost any other year FGT would have won best picture. I wish that could be redone. What an amazing list of the other movies that came out that year. Wow. FGT and they cannot be duplicated, or redone. (Thelma and Louise, Silence Of The Lambs, cmon) The best anyone, I think, should hope to accomplish is another adaptation that, in my opinion, would deserve a new name of it's own. Like say, The Whistle Stop Cafe, and it would stand on its own. You could get Hans Zimmer to do the music, Kathryn Bigelow to direct it unknowns to act in it and on and on. Just don't call it Fried Green Tomatoes.
If Buddy and Ruth didn't know each other in the book, how did Buddy die ( i'm assuming he dies in the book too ), as in the film, he died because he tried to get Ruth's hat on the railway track. Did he still die from being killed by the train, but there was another reason why he ended up on the railway track ?.
shareHush Up before someone makes barbecue out of you! (not me though, I can't cook)
shareIt will never be the right time to redo the movie. Everything about it was so incredibly perfect, all the pieces fell into place. Mary Stuart Masterson is Idgie, Kathy Bates is Evelyn Couch, and for there to be such a perfect cast, crew, director, screenplay is a once in a blue moon kind of thing.
And I read the book, and loved it and finished it in three hours. I was afraid to read it, because I didn't want to spoil my view of the movie, but the movie did such an incredible job keeping true to the essence of the book and its characters, so reading it only added to my appreciation of the film.
You're just a bee charmer, Idgie Threadgoode. That's what you are, a bee charmer.
I have a simple answer - NO! It is not because I agreed with suppressing the lesbian relationship ( I don't), rather because, despite that questionable decision, the film turned out so wonderful that I cannot imagine even thinking of this film without Jessica Tandy, Kathy Bates and Mary-Louise Parker. Once you have hit or approached perfection, you simply don't tamper with it.
share[deleted]
I would be hesitant, only because it was done so well. It's kind of a classic alongside Steel Magnolias.
share