F-U, Reboot-Mania: Express Your Hate Here

[BW Manilowe]

11 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

Oh I think, based on the opinion of those who watched/loved the original series, mine is the unpopular opinion.  And I did absolutely loved the series--even the cheesy movies they did in the 80s. (Which I will watch when or if Hallmark airs them.)

Personally, I don’t see any problem with the HBO/Matthew Rhys Perry Mason origin limited series. Mostly because it clearly is being described as this Perry exists in 1932, is a down on his luck private investigator & not a lawyer, & has other characteristics not ascribed to Raymond Burr’s version (a broken marriage; trouble dealing with his wartime experiences in France—I guess a forerunner to PTSD). I’m choosing to look at it as this is Perry before he became the version played by Raymond Burr, & there is a difference between them, to my mind.

[Jaded]

2 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

Hallmark Movies and Mysteries (you had the M’s reversed) was the last cable channel I know of that aired the Perry Mason revival TV movies, but I don’t think they’re on the current schedule; definitely not airing this week (they barely even air Columbo anymore). The channel didn’t even stop airing Christmas-themed movies until January 8th (I’ve been waiting for them to get back to the late-night mystery series reruns, like Hart to Hart; I wish they aired Ironside).

They seem to be airing one Perry Mason movie each day this week M-F.

[Anela]

On 1/15/2019 at 12:56 AM, Irlandesa said:

When I first heard about this project when RDJ was going to do the role, I was so against it.  But when I started hearing the rumors of Matthew Rhys taking the role, suddenly I was on board.

I'm on board even more now since it sounds very different from the legal years of the TV show.

Maybe it's that I don't remember much about Perry Mason, but I love Matthew Rhys, and I'll probably watch. 

[BW Manilowe]

1 hour ago, Jaded said:

They seem to be airing one Perry Mason movie each day this week M-F.

Thanks. I don’t know how I missed that.

[BW Manilowe]

12 minutes ago, Anela said:

Maybe it's that I don't remember much about Perry Mason, but I love Matthew Rhys, and I'll probably watch. 

My mom & I have lived in a retirement community/assisted living center since my dad died almost 2 years ago, because we both have health issues, & they don’t have HBO on their cable. So unless I can stream it somehow without needing 1 of those ID’s set up with your cable account that some streaming sites ask for, I’ll have to wait until it goes on free streaming sites or on DVD, I guess.

I like Matthew Rhys too; I’ve liked him since he was in Brothers & Sisters. It would be cool if Keri Russell had a role in this, like maybe as his ex, if we see her, unless they’re tired of working together & being a couple simultaneously right now.

[Anela]

37 minutes ago, BW Manilowe said:

My mom & I have lived in a retirement community/assisted living center since my dad died almost 2 years ago, because we both have health issues, & they don’t have HBO on their cable. So unless I can stream it somehow without needing 1 of those ID’s set up with your cable account that some streaming sites ask for, I’ll have to wait until it goes on free streaming sites or on DVD, I guess.

I like Matthew Rhys too; I’ve liked him since he was in Brothers & Sisters. It would be cool if Keri Russell had a role in this, like maybe as his ex, if we see her, unless they’re tired of working together & being a couple simultaneously right now.

I'll probably catch it on the free sites, because I can't afford $18 for HBO every month. You could try the free month that you get through their app (I was told I couldn't get the free month through Spectrum, in 2017), around the time the show finishes airing. I did that with Game of Thrones, only to then hear that it wouldn't be back for two more years. 

I loved Brothers and Sisters when I streamed the whole show at the end of 2014. I'd only watched it a couple of times when it started in 2006, I don't know why I didn't get back to it. Loved The Americans, too. 

Edited January 16, 2019 by Anela

[biakbiak]

4 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

I’m choosing to look at it as this is Perry before he became the version played by Raymond Burr,

Which is funny because Matthew is older than Raymond Burr was when he started playing Perry Mason.

[Trini]

I guess this goes here, too:

Freeform Picks Up "Party of Five" to Series

Quote

... Freeform announces the pickup to series of the reboot of fan-favorite "Party of Five" from the original creators, Amy Lippman and Chris Keyser. From Sony Pictures Television, the one-hour drama will follow the five Acosta children as they navigate daily life struggles to survive as a family unit after their parents are suddenly deported to Mexico. The series stars Brandon Larracuente as Emilio, Emily Tosta as Lucia, Niko Guardado as Beto and Elle Paris Legaspi as Valentina. The pilot was co-written by Lippman, Keyser and newcomer Michal Zebede.

[Anela]

2 hours ago, Trini said:

I guess this goes here, too:

Freeform Picks Up "Party of Five" to Series

They can't leave anything alone. 

[magicdog]

On 2/4/2019 at 7:26 PM, Anela said:

They can't leave anything alone. 

Talk about an unnecessary redux!

[Minneapple]

We were discussing this Party of Five "reboot" in the Race and Ethnicity thread, and honestly it sounds nothing like Party of Five. Not even sure why they're bothering to call it that. 

[Ceindreadh]

I’m only a few episodes in but I’m really liking the Magnum P.I. reboot. 

I’m glad they didn’t make too many too many drastic changes with the characters and their relationships to each other. (Yes, I know, female Higgins etc, they’re still starting out with the same working relationship as the original)

My only complaint initially was that the guys seemed too young. And then I checked IMDb.com and realized that the actors - Rick and Magnum anyway - are actually older than the originals were starting out. And now I’m realizing that it’s just that I’m no longer younger than the characters, doh! 

Hopefully TPTB won’t screw it up like they did H50. 

[BW Manilowe]

37 minutes ago, Ceindreadh said:

I’m only a few episodes in but I’m really liking the Magnum P.I. reboot. 

I’m glad they didn’t make too many too many drastic changes with the characters and their relationships to each other. (Yes, I know, female Higgins etc, they’re still starting out with the same working relationship as the original)

My only complaint initially was that the guys seemed too young. And then I checked IMDb.com and realized that the actors - Rick and Magnum anyway - are actually older than the originals were starting out. And now I’m realizing that it’s just that I’m no longer younger than the characters, doh! 

Hopefully TPTB won’t screw it up like they did H50. 

In case you hadn’t heard, they already renewed the show for S2; they did it on January 25th.

Edited February 9, 2019 by BW Manilowe
To fix a date.

[Rose Quartz]

5 hours ago, Ceindreadh said:

I’m only a few episodes in but I’m really liking the Magnum P.I. reboot. 

I’m glad they didn’t make too many too many drastic changes with the characters and their relationships to each other. (Yes, I know, female Higgins etc, they’re still starting out with the same working relationship as the original)

My only complaint initially was that the guys seemed too young. And then I checked IMDb.com and realized that the actors - Rick and Magnum anyway - are actually older than the originals were starting out. And now I’m realizing that it’s just that I’m no longer younger than the characters, doh! 

Hopefully TPTB won’t screw it up like they did H50. 

I'm glad I'm not the only one who likes the reboot!  I really got sucked in when I started recognizing little nods to the original like Kami calling Rick "Casablanca" and TC being interested in the arts.  The show sometimes has a little too much Higgins for my taste, especially since I never really cared for that character in the original, but it seems to have found a better balance since it came back from winter break.

And, yes, I've thought the same thing about the actors too and started to do the math and then stopped because it was too darned depressing!

[roamyn]

4 hours ago, Rose Quartz said:

I'm glad I'm not the only one who likes the reboot!  I really got sucked in when I started recognizing little nods to the original like Kami calling Rick "Casablanca" and TC being interested in the arts.  The show sometimes has a little too much Higgins for my taste, especially since I never really cared for that character in the original, but it seems to have found a better balance since it came back from winter break.

And, yes, I've thought the same thing about the actors too and started to do the math and then stopped because it was too darned depressing!

Yeah, well I despise it.  Just as much as I despise Baby MacGyver.

The lead is bland, boring and a terrible actor.  The Higgins character is over-the-Top, and on too much (hubby watches both of these, so I’ll see them on occasion).

[Rose Quartz]

2 hours ago, roamyn said:

Yeah, well I despise it.  Just as much as I despise Baby MacGyver.

The lead is bland, boring and a terrible actor.  The Higgins character is over-the-Top, and on too much (hubby watches both of these, so I’ll see them on occasion).

Baby MacGyver - ha!  I'm with you on that one.  Every time I see clips of the show I wonder why he isn't in school and it pulls me right out of the story so I gave up on that one pretty quick.

[millennium]

On 12/6/2018 at 11:18 PM, legaleagle53 said:

So did I.  I always thought it was grossly underrated.  Many of Night Gallery's episodes were scarier than a lot of Twilight Zone episodes!

I am a longtime Night Gallery fan.  I remember as a kid watching the reruns at 11 pm every night of summer vacation on Boston's UHF Channel 56.   I still watch it on Hulu from time to time.  Episodes like "The Dead Man," "The Caterpillar," and "Brenda" made a permanent impression on me.  

I have no hope that this new effort can approximate what was achieved in the original series.   First, because it's a Syfy product.   And more important, this new series has no Jack Laird, who was not only one of the geniuses behind Night Gallery, but also the late '70s miniseries "The Dark Secret of Harvest Home."

Horror anthologies have come and gone in the years since Night Gallery.   None of them ever survive for long.   Maybe it was the times or the cinematic style, or the vision and technique of men like Jack Laird and Dan Curtis, but those made in the 1970s stick in the memory when all the others have been forgotten: Night Gallery, Ghost Story/Circle of Fear, Kolchak The Night Stalker, Dark Shadows, etc.

The Night Gallery paintings were great.   Back in the day, you could buy posters of them from an ad in comic books.   Some of the actual paintings have survived and command very high prices on the rare occasions they are offered for sale (even those posters fetch a pretty penny now).   There was an artist on eBay a few years ago who would duplicate the original paintings on canvas.   He was very, very good.

Edited February 10, 2019 by millennium

[Annber03]

39 minutes ago, millennium said:

Horror anthologies have come and gone in the years since Night Gallery.   None of them ever survive for long.   Maybe it was the times or the cinematic style, or the vision and technique of men like Jack Laird and Dan Curtis, but those made in the 1970s stick in the memory when all the others have been forgotten: Night Gallery, Ghost Story/Circle of Fear, Kolchak The Night Stalker, Dark Shadows, etc.

I love horror anthologies, though you are right that a lot of them never seem to last very long (there was one I used to watch as a teenager, "Night Visions", that lasted for, like, a season. Same with NBC's "Fear Itself"). I think some of the later horror anthologies that have come along had some good moments and episodes, but yeah, anthology series in general seem to kinda go in and out of fashion (they seem to be having a bit of a resurgence now). And so many horror shows (and movies, for that matter) nowadays feel the need to add in unnecessary gore and special effects that take away from the genuinely creepy nature of the stories and such as well, which doesn't help. 

Quote

The Night Gallery paintings were great.   Back in the day, you could buy posters of them from an ad in comic books.   Some of the actual paintings have survived and command very high prices on the rare occasions they are offered for sale (even those posters fetch a pretty penny now).   There was an artist on eBay a few years ago who would duplicate the original paintings on canvas.   He was very, very good.

Did not know that! That's pretty cool. If I had that kind of money, I would've totally brought one of those paintings. 

[Raja]

21 hours ago, Rose Quartz said:

Baby MacGyver - ha!  I'm with you on that one.  Every time I see clips of the show I wonder why he isn't in school and it pulls me right out of the story so I gave up on that one pretty quick.

It wasn't so much that MacGyver was younger than it was when I tuned in and there was Jack Dalton just blazing away with his gun. I was thinking oh you people missed the entire point of MacGyver doing it without shooting his way out of everything like every other action team.  Now I understand Dalton has been written off and he will be replaced by an American Juliet Higgins to shoot at people.

[opus]

Nickelodeon is bring back Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?  John Cena hosts

 https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/nickelodeon-brings-back-are-you-smarter-than-a-5th-grader-2019-02-14

Edited February 18, 2019 by opus

[SVNBob]

7 hours ago, opus said:

Nickelodeon is bring back Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader? 

They're also bringing back All That, with old cast member Kenan Thompson as the EP.

Kenan has said that his heterosexual life partner Kel Mitchell will be making an appearance on the new show, and that the door is open for all the former cast members to show up if they want.

[biakbiak]

STOP THE MADNESS!!!! Stupid “twisty” 90210 revival.

[GHScorpiosRule]

17 hours ago, biakbiak said:

STOP THE MADNESS!!!! Stupid “twisty” 90210 revival.

No. Just NO! FUCKING NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not clicking on that link; but I heard about it on the radio this morning, and that Brenda*, Brandon, and Dylan will not be featured. IF I were inclined to watch, this would be a deal breaker for me, because those three were my favorite characters.  Yes, even in the later years of Brandon's uber annoying moralizing and smug superiority. I stopped watching the original after Brandon left and then only watched the series finale.

So not interested in this. I wonder if what happened to the characters that was explained in the first REBOOT will be part of canon? You know, how Kelly-I.choose.me.butdidn'tbecausesheimmediatelybeganarelationshipwithCokeheadColin birthed Dylan's child? That the TWUUUUUU WUV of David and Donna didn't last and they wuz divorced?

Madness Indeed.

*Though I can understand why Shannen is not featured, assuming she was approached, due to her chemo.

[ganesh]

I read the article - it sounded to me like they're doing a version of the "Seinfeld reunion" that aired on Curb Your Enthusiasm, where the actors are playing themselves. 

[UYI]

YES! The Baby Sitters Club!

https://ew.com/tv/2019/02/28/baby-sitters-club-series-netflix/

I, of course, having grown up in the 90's, am still heavily biased towards the original 1990-1992 TV series, which originally aired on HBO, then spent years in reruns on the Disney Channel when it was still actually good (which is where I watched it, even though it was on VHS, too). It also was briefly on Netflix a few years ago, so I hope that means that they will bring that version back too to go along with airing this newer series. Needless to say, I read the books, too. 

And it was announced yesterday, on my 30th birthday. What a present. ^_^

Here are the opening and closing themes of the original series, which unfortunately I can't embed. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-ierdtgY6o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrM3BWxA_x8

ETA: The 90's TV series>>>>>>>>>>>>the 1995 movie. Fight me. 

Edited March 2, 2019 by UYI

[Annber03]

26 minutes ago, UYI said:

I, of course, having grown up in the 90's, am still heavily biased towards the original 1990-1992 TV series, which originally aired on HBO, then spent years in reruns on the Disney Channel when it was still actually good (which is where I watched it, even though it was on VHS, too). It also was briefly on Netflix a few years ago, so I hope that means that they will bring that version back too to go along with airing this newer series.

And it was announced yesterday, on my 30th birthday. What a present. ^_^

Here are the opening and closing themes of the original series, which unfortunately I can't embed. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-ierdtgY6o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrM3BWxA_x8

I'm honestly surprised they never released that series on DVD at some point over the years. I too hope they can bring it back to streaming sites-it'd be nice to see those episodes again. I remember having the VHS tapes as a kid. 

And maaaaaaaan, the nostalgia just watching the opening and closing credits. I remember that episode with Stacey very clearly. 

(Happy belated birthday, by the way :)!)

[UYI]

2 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

I'm honestly surprised they never released that series on DVD at some point over the years. I too hope they can bring it back to streaming sites-it'd be nice to see those episodes again. I remember having the VHS tapes as a kid. 

And maaaaaaaan, the nostalgia just watching the opening and closing credits. I remember that episode with Stacey very clearly. 

(Happy belated birthday, by the way :)!)

Thank you! 🙂

I want to say they DID release the show on DVD at some point. I don't think they were available for very long, though. 

[BaggythePanther]

Grew up in the 90s also and loved reading the Baby Sitters Club books. My family didn’t have cable in the early 90s so I never watched the show. But I loved (and own on VHS) the 1995 movie. 

I’m really curious to see how they’ll update the series. The book/show is a product of its time.

[methodwriter85]

On 3/4/2019 at 11:49 PM, BaggythePanther said:

I’m really curious to see how they’ll update the series. The book/show is a product of its time.

I guarantee Kristy will be a lesbian. I always thought that if Ann M Martin could have gotten away with it, Kristy would have been a lesbian. Or maybe they'll through us a curveball and Stacey will be the lesbian instead.

It does seem like Netflix has a lot of tween offerings so I'd probably brush up on what they're currently doing in order to get a feel for what the tone would be like. I could be wrong, though. I really thought Girl Meets World was going to go for a tone that as similar to Good Luck Charle/Austin and Ally and they went for a weird, off-puttingly serious yet also too fluffy to be real tone that just didn't work for a lot of that series.

I wonder if the 90210 revival is going to be put on hold for a bit? Luke Perry didn't sign up but they're still going to have to address his death somehow, especially because of the "reality" component.

[SVNBob]

21 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

I wonder if the 90210 revival is going to be put on hold for a bit? Luke Perry didn't sign up but they're still going to have to address his death somehow, especially because of the "reality" component.

Could they tastefully make his death into the catalyst for the revival?  Like most of them gathering together at or after a funeral, talking about how good it is to see the rest, and that snowballs into the idea of the revival?

[methodwriter85]

I mean, I really don't see how they can get around it because of the reality component. They are going to have to bring up Luke Perry's death. He is way too iconic to the show to just handwave him away as doing other projects now.

Edited March 7, 2019 by methodwriter85

[AntiBeeSpray]

On 2/19/2019 at 1:14 AM, SVNBob said:

They're also bringing back All That, with old cast member Kenan Thompson as the EP.

Kenan has said that his heterosexual life partner Kel Mitchell will be making an appearance on the new show, and that the door is open for all the former cast members to show up if they want.

Loved that show back in the day. Hope they're able to pull it off.

[Jaded]

I liked a show on Nick called Roundhouse that came a bit before All That I think. I always wished they'd try that one again. I think it's neat that Kenan is helping to bring All That back though.

[UYI]

Sometimes you don't know what dreams you have until they actually come true. This is one of those times. I'm STOKED!

https://deadline.com/2019/04/jimmy-kimmel-norman-lear-all-in-the-family-the-jeffersons-live-special-woody-harrelson-jamie-foxx-jimmy-burrows-1202598689/

[UYI]

On 3/6/2019 at 3:43 AM, methodwriter85 said:

I guarantee Kristy will be a lesbian. I always thought that if Ann M Martin could have gotten away with it, Kristy would have been a lesbian. Or maybe they'll through us a curveball and Stacey will be the lesbian instead.

I actually think that Kristy being straight provided another good message for young girls: that just because you love sports doesn't automatically make you gay/any less of a girl.

Obviously, there's nothing WRONG with being gay (and it sure as hell does NOT make you any less of a girl!), and it's possible that's what Ann M. Martin was going for all along, but I think it's possible to see it this way, too. 

Edited April 19, 2019 by UYI

[Friendly kitty]

On 3/7/2019 at 8:20 AM, methodwriter85 said:

I mean, I really don't see how they can get around it because of the reality component. They are going to have to bring up Luke Perry's death. He is way too iconic to the show to just handwave him away as doing other projects now.

As written above, they can show that Dylan is dead and his friends are going to his death. That's where it all starts. Then they will tell us about our old friends, show our favorite characters and slowly begin to acquaint viewers with new characters who will be the main characters in the series. Since, I think, the main roles will be played by young people who will study at school, as it was in the first seasons...

But yes, I am waiting for reboot with horror. I'm not sure that he will be good ...

[Browncoat]

1 hour ago, Friendly kitty said:

As written above, they can show that Dylan is dead and his friends are going to his death. That's where it all starts. Then they will tell us about our old friends, show our favorite characters

Sounds like The Big Chill.

[methodwriter85]

On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 11:54 AM, UYI said:

I actually think that Kristy being straight provided another good message for young girls: that just because you love sports doesn't automatically make you gay/any less of a girl.

Obviously, there's nothing WRONG with being gay (and it sure as hell does NOT make you any less of a girl!), and it's possible that's what Ann M. Martin was going for all along, but I think it's possible to see it this way, too. 

That's a good point but there's this general trend now of trying to add LGBT characters to shows aimed at kids (Andi Mack got major snaps for this) and I can see a reboot going with this especially because a lot of reboots want to be "woke" a la the current iteration of Sabrina with its trans character. I feel like with 6 female characters there will be someone made gay. I think the new Anne of Green Gables show also added in some kind of LGBT character.

[roamyn]

On 4/19/2019 at 11:51 AM, UYI said:

Sometimes you don't know what dreams you have until they actually come true. This is one of those times. I'm STOKED!

https://deadline.com/2019/04/jimmy-kimmel-norman-lear-all-in-the-family-the-jeffersons-live-special-woody-harrelson-jamie-foxx-jimmy-burrows-1202598689/

It would be really great if they could find a role for Lenny Kravitz, Roxie Roker’s RL son.  Maybe as George & Louise’s son.  Lenny certainly can pass for mid 30s he looks so good.

[BaggythePanther]

On 4/19/2019 at 10:54 AM, UYI said:

I actually think that Kristy being straight provided another good message for young girls: that just because you love sports doesn't automatically make you gay/any less of a girl.

Obviously, there's nothing WRONG with being gay (and it sure as hell does NOT make you any less of a girl!), and it's possible that's what Ann M. Martin was going for all along, but I think it's possible to see it this way, too. 

On 4/20/2019 at 11:40 PM, methodwriter85 said:

That's a good point but there's this general trend now of trying to add LGBT characters to shows aimed at kids (Andi Mack got major snaps for this) and I can see a reboot going with this especially because a lot of reboots want to be "woke" a la the current iteration of Sabrina with its trans character. I feel like with 6 female characters there will be someone made gay. I think the new Anne of Green Gables show also added in some kind of LGBT character.

I agree that the show will probably try to add a LGBT character. I’m sure whoever is doing this series will be lazy and have Kristy be the lesbian, but I think it be a better message as @UYI said, to have Kristy (the tomboy) be straight and one of the other girls as a lesbian. What good is being inclusive if you’re just going to play into stereotypes?

I don’t think I’ve seen this posted yet- ABC wants to reboot New York Undercover: https://deadline.com/2019/01/new-york-undercover-reboot-pilot-ordered-abc-dick-wolf-ben-watkins-anthony-hemingway-1202545449/

[methodwriter85]

See, that one I can actually see because the show was pretty "woke" for the 90's. They even talked about internet predators WAY before Chris Hansen.  It was already multicultural and urban and I can see it being relatively easy to update.

Quote

I agree that the show will probably try to add a LGBT character. I’m sure whoever is doing this series will be lazy and have Kristy be the lesbian, but I think it be a better message as @UYI said, to have Kristy (the tomboy) be straight and one of the other girls as a lesbian. What good is being inclusive if you’re just going to play into stereotypes?

The other thing I wonder about is that there was a fair amount of stuff in the book series (not really in the 1990's t.v. show or movie) about the racism that Jessi faced being black in a lily-white town. That could be interesting but I kind of wonder  if they'll just ignore it and make Stoneybrook less white. I hope they do actually have that.

I remember parody fanfic would make fun of the fact that each babysitter would kind of tip-toe around the fact that Jessi is black. Along the lines of, "There's no way to say this, but Jessi black. And we love her anyways!"

Edited April 26, 2019 by methodwriter85

[biakbiak]

I still won’t be watching  but Shannon Doherty is joining the 90210 reboot.

[Guest]

On 3/1/2019 at 6:19 PM, Annber03 said:

I'm honestly surprised they never released that series on DVD at some point over the years. I too hope they can bring it back to streaming sites-it'd be nice to see those episodes again. I remember having the VHS tapes as a kid. 

I just found out about the remake and was searching for more information and discovered that the original series is on Hulu. 

Edited April 28, 2019 by Guest

[Kromm]

On 1/14/2019 at 8:16 PM, DearEvette said:

Ok, so I saw this headline but for some reason my eye only saw "Matthew" and  "Perry".  And my first thought was, whose bright idea was it to have Matthew Perry play Perry Mason?  LOL.

I'm fine with characters who originated in books being redone multiple times on TV or in movies.  Why?  Because the definitive version IS the book version already and so ANY TV or movie version is just an interpretation.

I also generally am fond of efforts to go back to basics on TV/movie redos for book characters. There was a time when book characters were routinely heavily changed for other mediums. For example, brought into the present.  But because book versions usually pre-date even the initial adaptations by a lot, you could have books set in the 20s and 30s, an initial adaptation set in the 50s and 60s, and then a redo set back in the 20s. And that's good. It refreshes the concept by going back more to the books.

To use an odd little seen example, there was a TV version of the Nero Wolfe books set in the time it was made (1981 basically) starring William Conrad. It was pretty bad.  The character just didn't fit in the 80s, even though Conrad was a really good actor.  But when they did another version in the early 2000s, starring Maury Chaykin?  It was set in the original time period the oldest of those books had originated in--the late 30s and early 40s--and was really neat.

Edited April 29, 2019 by Kromm

[BW Manilowe]

22 minutes ago, Kromm said:

I'm fine with characters who originated in books being redone multiple times on TV or in movies.  Why?  Because the definitive version IS the book version already and so ANY TV or movie version is just an interpretation.

I also generally am fond of efforts to go back to basics on TV/movie redos for book characters. There was a time when book characters were routinely heavily changed for other mediums. For example, brought into the present.  But because book versions usually pre-date even the initial adaptations by a lot, you could have books set in the 20s and 30s, an initial adaptation set in the 50s and 60s, and then a redo set back in the 20s. And that's good. It refreshes the concept by going back more to the books.

To use an odd little seen example, there was a TV version of the Nero Wolfe books set in the time it was made (1981 basically) starring Robert Conrad. It was pretty bad.  The character just didn't fit in the 80s, even though Conrad was a really good actor.  But when they did another version in the early 2000s, starring Maury Chaykin?  It was set in the original time period the oldest of those books had originated in--the late 30s and early 40s--and was really neat.

William Conrad (who went on to successful, long running roles in Cannon & Jake and the Fat Man, possibly among others I’m forgetting) played Nero Wolfe in the TV iteration you’re thinking about; his sidekick, Archie, was played by Lee Horsley, of Matt Houston fame (Is he even acting anymore?).

[Kromm]

2 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

William Conrad (who went on to successful, long running roles in Cannon & Jake and the Fat Man, possibly among others I’m forgetting) played Nero Wolfe in the TV iteration you’re thinking about; his sidekick, Archie, was played by Lee Horsley, of Matt Houston fame (Is he even acting anymore?).

Fixed.

Thanks. I knew that but just had a weird memory lapse.  

[ratgirlagogo]

6 hours ago, Kromm said:

I'm fine with characters who originated in books being redone multiple times on TV or in movies.  Why?  Because the definitive version IS the book version already and so ANY TV or movie version is just an interpretation.

I also generally am fond of efforts to go back to basics on TV/movie redos for book characters. There was a time when book characters were routinely heavily changed for other mediums. For example, brought into the present.  But because book versions usually pre-date even the initial adaptations by a lot, you could have books set in the 20s and 30s, an initial adaptation set in the 50s and 60s, and then a redo set back in the 20s. And that's good. It refreshes the concept by going back more to the books.

To use an odd little seen example, there was a TV version of the Nero Wolfe books set in the time it was made (1981 basically) starring William Conrad. It was pretty bad.  The character just didn't fit in the 80s, even though Conrad was a really good actor.  But when they did another version in the early 2000s, starring Maury Chaykin?  It was set in the original time period the oldest of those books had originated in--the late 30s and early 40s--and was really neat.

Yes, I feel the same.  I grew up with Raymond Burr's Perry Mason and when I eventually saw 1930's Perry Mason films with Warren William (and Ricardo Cortez and Donald Woods) it was really hard to even recognize them as versions of the same characters from the TV show.  Perry in the 30's period is a brilliant lawyer, but he's also a high-living drunk and kind of a dick.  Probably would have been played by John Barrymore if the studio could have afforded him, it's that kind of character.  

So I'm just curious in this case to see what the writers and the actors do with the characters.

Edited April 29, 2019 by ratgirlagogo

[bmasters9]

On 4/28/2019 at 5:26 PM, Kromm said:

I'm fine with characters who originated in books being redone multiple times on TV or in movies.  Why?  Because the definitive version IS the book version already and so ANY TV or movie version is just an interpretation.

So, per your logic, both Sarah Polley's 1988 PBS Ramona and Joey King's 2010 film Ramona were merely interpretations of that classic Beverly Cleary children's book character?

[ratgirlagogo]

On 4/30/2019 at 4:34 PM, bmasters9 said:

So, per your logic, both Sarah Polley's 1988 PBS Ramona and Joey King's 2010 film Ramona were merely interpretations of that classic Beverly Cleary children's book character?

Not defending Kromm's position since I am of course not Kromm.  But I would assume that yes, both were interpretations of the character in the books, but  I never saw either adaptation.  I'd  guess from your question that you don't like at least one of these adaptations, maybe both?  Why?

[bmasters9]

32 minutes ago, ratgirlagogo said:

I'd  guess from your question that you don't like at least one of these adaptations, maybe both?  Why?

Not true-- I do like the Joey King 2010 Ramona film; it's one of my favorites. I only asked because Kromm was fine with films/shows made from established book series, and I was seeking clarification of what was being said; I did not realize that how I said it could lead you to believe otherwise.

Sorry for the confusion!