I'm normally opposed to attempted remakes and the Steve McQueen version of "The Blob" is still by far my favorite, but I must admit that "The Blob" reimagined from 1988 is quite entertaining!
You all know the drill - an old man finds a fallen meteor, touches it and it starts to eat him. Along comes Brian Flagg town rebel (Kevin Dillon), Meg Penny cheerleader (Shawnee Smith) and Paul Taylor football star (Donovan Leitch) to the save the day. Meg and Paul rush old man with goo on arm to hospital. Too late... old man is unfortunate oozing sight of former self.
Watch out Paul!!! Sorry Paul.. who several of us thought might be the hero just got devoured in horrific fashion.
After the blob kills a few more people.. the local sheriff immediately pins it all on bad boy Brian.
The only logical solution: Brian and Meg must team up to save the town, fall in love, and destroy this nasty blob.
"The Blob" is campy fun and one thing that I always thought was hilarious was the movie theater scenes with one of the best 'movies within a movie' called "Garden Tool Massacre", a spoof of the Friday the 13th flicks. What makes it even more classic is that it stars Julie McCullough from "Growing Pains" fame.
"Wait, hockey season ended months ago."
I heard recently Rob Zombie was hoping to remake "The Blob" once again.. I think plans are on hold.. but it will probably happen someday.
Any Fans of The Blob?
[ 17. May 2010, 17:15: Message edited by: Valley ]
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I first saw this movie..I was secretly kinda hoping Shawnee Smith would die a horrible gruesome death at the end...Her character in this movie just annoyed me.
But anyway..this is a good movie..or good remake I should say. And the make-up work in this, especially with the death scenes is really quite impressive..even by today's standards. It's films like this that uses the classic make-up and gore effects that make me miss these days and make me even more fed up with all the CGI bull$hit they use to a nausiating degree now.
So yes, I'm a fan of this film..I still own an old VHS copy of it that I throw on from time to time when the mood hits.
I really hope Rob Zombie doesn't remake this again though..i think that'd just be a waste and overall would ruin the film. This 88' remake stands well enough on it's own and I don't think another remake is needed after the fine work done in this film.
Here's my little contribution to this thread..my favorite death scene in the movie.
The concept of 'The Blob' genuinely unnerved me when I was younger. Still does. Unreasoning, unfeeling, destructive goo. Nasty.
quote:Here's my little contribution to this thread..my favorite death scene in the movie.
No no no no no no no. I still don't like seeing that. My hatred of all things 'blob' is alive and well.
Posts: 3383 | From: England | Registered: May 2003 | Site Updates: 21
| IP: Logged |
aTomiK
.... has green eyes as well....
Member # 6575
posted
The Blob is a classic 80s sci-fi/horror movie in my books. Director Chuck Russell was a really important man back in the day, look at his cv:
Director: The Blob, The Nightmare on Elm Street III Writer: The Blob, The Nightmare on Elm Street III (Both with another genius Frank Darabont) Producer: Hell Night, Dreamscape, Body Rock, Girls Just Want to Have Fun, Back to School.
I love this man!
And i like Kevin Dillon. Although he´s not the best actor in the planet, he was always somekind of rebel, cool dude. Heaven Help Us, Platoon, Remote Control, The Rescue, The Blob... all cool stuff. I really need to watch his ´88 flick War Party again.
And what about Shawnee Smith, veeery pretty. Yes, a little bit annoying character but she played that part well
Great atmosphere throughout the flick and a real homage to the ´58 original. The 80s way.
Now have you seen the ´72 version Son of Blob aka Beware! The Blob that Larry Hagman directed? What a campy masterpiece
Here´s the finnish VHS cover art for the ´88 version:
Posts: 7054 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2008 | Site Updates: 7
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK..I'm bumping this thread just to emphasize how great a movie this is...cuz I can I just watched it again for the 217th time and I still love it. If you don't have this movie on your Halloween movie viewing list..add it now.
Posts: 1802 | From: Planet Druidia | Registered: Jan 2009 | Site Updates: 3
| IP: Logged |
Valley Dated Julie From 'Valley Girl' (allegedly!)
Member # 1322
posted
Thanks pyro.. "The Blob" is now on my list for this week.
Hey Ronnie.. Donovan Leitch sighting!
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now Valley, remakes are suppose to reintroduce new generations to stories and ideas they couldn't get easy access too. Some of your fave movies could be remakes you know like Scarface or The Thing, did you know?
Rob Zombie's The Blob, he is gonna produce it and there's someone else directing it. I mean it's like how many Invasion of the Body Snatchers movies can you have? the only good Invasion remake was 1978 and the last 2 are just lame.
I grew up with The Blob (1988) when i was 7 when it came out in theaters, enjoyed it and also saw the original cheesy movie. Do you think this remake was done with love and respect by filmmakers who care about the original and grew up with it so they can reintroduce it to a new generation? personally i think this one is better than the original.
Who knew the female star of the Saw franchise started off in this movie?
Posts: 125 | From: Santa Ana, California | Registered: Sep 2010 | Site Updates: 0
| IP: Logged |
Valley Dated Julie From 'Valley Girl' (allegedly!)
Member # 1322
quote:Originally posted by HarryCanyon: Now Valley, remakes are suppose to reintroduce new generations to stories and ideas they couldn't get easy access too. Some of your fave movies could be remakes you know like Scarface or The Thing, did you know?
Harry.. do you work as an executive at a movie studio or something? ha .. the reason I say that is because the whole 'introducing a new generation to a story' sounds like something a studio exec might state while the real truth is it is all about making money.
I have actually softened my stance on remakes and totally agree that "The Thing".. "The Blob".. "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and a few others are worthy efforts and stand well on their own. But overall.. so many remakes are poorly conceived and never recapture the magic of the originals that spawned them.
Thus bringing me back to the remake that crushingly tip the scale to the darkside for me:
Valley Girl 2011
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
posted
Was The Thing and The Fly remakes done for money? or were they done by established filmmakers who grew up with the original hokey movies and did the remakes with love in their heart instead of profit right?
Posts: 125 | From: Santa Ana, California | Registered: Sep 2010 | Site Updates: 0
| IP: Logged |
Valley Dated Julie From 'Valley Girl' (allegedly!)
Member # 1322
posted
Harry, we might be looking at remakes from two different angles.. I totally believe that Carpenter and Cronenberg were huge fans of the original films and directed these flicks because they had a passion for it.
I'm thinking more of the producers that gave the remakes a greenlight.
Love or Money? How about both?
"The Thing" made $5 million more than budget and "The Fly" made $25 more than budget in the USA alone.
These were both outstanding remakes made in the 80's.. my issue with remakes is more from today. It just seems that so many of them are not for the love, but more for the attempt to make money. Though it can be argued that some of them flopped similar to the "Miami Vice" remake because of the lack of love for the original.
Examples:
The Dukes of Hazzard - 30 million in profit Starsky and Hutch - 28 million in profit Clash of the Titans - 38 million in profit
I do think you make a valid point that it isn't all about money for everyone involved in a remake and I realize that the 80's had its share of remakes that I consider excellent movies.
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did you know that films like True Lies, Scarface, Ocean's 11, The Ring, Man on Fire, Heat, Man Who Knew Too Much, Ben-Hur, The Deaprted, 3 Men and a Baby, 12 Monkeys, Star Wars, The Nutty Professor, Fatal Attraction, 3:10 to Yuma, Munich, Alien, Magnificent Seven, Casino Royale, The Maltese Falcon, The Ring, Scent of a Woman, Cape Fear etc. were remakes? These are movies we grew up with them in the 80's and 90's to today thinking they were original as now i found out that they were remakes. They introduced us of our generations to stories and ideas or films we couldn't get easy or privy access to.
I HAVE no problem with remakes for i see movies as a movies. For those hating remakes just take cinema too seriously. You and everyone should understand that remakes are NOT suppose to ruin childhoods but are made to reintroduce movies, stories and ideas to new generations. If it wasn't for Al Pacino's Scarface then there's be no knowledge for the original and i'm sure that a lot of young people today (The Twilight generation) would have been obilvious to the existence of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or "King Kong" if not for the Marcus Naspiel and Peter Jackson movies. Shooting down a remake for simply being a remake is WRONG in my view.
Do you think a remake only works if a filmmaker cares for the original movie and not for money? even if it's an autuer. Now let's take a look at "Psycho" from 1998, truly horrible remake because there was nothing wrong with the original flawless masterpiece. I mean Psycho 1998 was just a terrible shot-to-shot remake done frame-by-frame with nothing new and fresh added, the same dialog which is awkward when the film was suppose to be set in 1998 when they were talking like it's 1959 even about not marrying due to alimoney as people don't talk like that anymore when they could have updated the dialog. Same costumes and cars like in the original when they should have updated the clothes and cars when it could have been 1998. The original Psycho is still an untouchable masterpiece while the sequels were good and better than Van Sant's mess. Now Halloween didn't needed to be remade but Rob Zombie had a passion for the first 2 Halloween movies back in 1978 and 1981 as he hated the rest of the Halloween movies and had a love for the first 2 Halloween movies as he combined both in one movie back in 2007 with his devotion and love for the original movie. Same goes to Alexandra Aja who had experience in France with many movies like "High Tension" remade "The Hills Have Eyes" very well because he had a love for the original movie since he was a kid and had Wes Craven to co-wrote and produce the movie. Peter Jackson grew up with the old King Kong movie and always wanted to re-do it and he succeeded with his love and passion for the original classic.
Sometimes we have to be like Elm Street 2010 director Samuel Bayer when he quoted this on the Elm Street 2010 interview if people can accept a new Freddy and new Elm Street: "I don't think it's a common mantra, afterall Batman has been reinvented recently thanks to Christopher Nolan. I think Burton is a genius but Nolan reinvented the superhero genre. Heath Ledger's Joker made everyone forget about Jack Nicholson, the new batmobile made me forget about the old batmobile. And that's the way were are approaching Nightmare on Elm Street, If people are willing to hold on to the past i think they are making a mistake. It's not just reimagining it, but reinventing it to a much darker, more serious thought out way".
Do you agree or disagree because he's a just a music video director who has a first time directing? did Cronenberg and Carpenter told people to forget the past when they did their remakes or are they real moviemakers as they say "Watch both versions of the movies we remade and have fun with both the original and remake"? same goes for Chuck Russel's "The Blob" right because he cares and loves the original?
now i can't wait for the new Fright Night which is gonna be from the makers of "Buffy" which is a good thing since the director who did many episodes on Buffy cares about the original movie since he was a teen in the 80's could work out well even if the original was a fun and cheesy tounge-in-cheek movie that didn't take itself seriously. Could be perfect for the Twilight generation. Now The Crazies was damn good because the director grew up with the original movie and stayed faithful yet different to the original source while Romero who did the original produced and co-wrote it.
It could be good sometimes if a director of the original movie could remake their own movies in scripts, directing or producing. Like "Heat" for example is an excellent remake of the poor 1989 TV movie that Michael Mann did called "L.A. Takedown" as he didn't have the time or ideas to get the original idea to translate well for the TV screen but redid his own movie as "Heat" for the big screen to make it better.
Posts: 125 | From: Santa Ana, California | Registered: Sep 2010 | Site Updates: 0
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thus bringing me back to the remake that crushingly tip the scale to the darkside for me:
Valley Girl 2011
Make it go away.
I agree with Valley; most remakes are studios cashing in on a name. Most of the 80's remakes mentioned were - as you say Harry - made by people who genuinely loved the originals. But it's worth pointing out that they also remade them because they had been B-movies from an age of 'inferior' film-making techniques (I hope you get what I mean by that). The gulf between 1955 and 1985 was a huge one, so those 'old' movies were crying out to be remade. The gulf between 1985 and today is much smaller.
But you know what? I would've loved to see a 'Goonies 2' (with the original team), I would have loved to see a '32 Candles' (same team). It seems to me that the real golden opportunities were passed on (one by the studio and the other by Hughes) in favour of the cheap, easy, no thought required route of remakes. That's why I'm so impressed with the 'Tron' sequel. A part of me can't quite believe they got it made!
Posts: 3383 | From: England | Registered: May 2003 | Site Updates: 21
| IP: Logged |
Valley Dated Julie From 'Valley Girl' (allegedly!)
Member # 1322
posted
I think this thread has turned into "The Son of the Blob".
Harry & Logan.. excellent comments and definitely thought provoking.
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
Valley Dated Julie From 'Valley Girl' (allegedly!)
Member # 1322
posted
logan.. I kinda view remakes and sequels a bit different.
I'm actually not opposed to sequel attempts with original cast members. I do think the window for success is tight in most instances though.. say 10 years or less from the original. Of course, "32 Candles" would have been a blast to watch.
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
posted
That was a big post Harry... perhaps a bit too big!
quote:Did you know that films like True Lies, Scarface, Ocean's 11, The Ring, Man on Fire, Heat, Man Who Knew Too Much, Ben-Hur, The Deaprted, 3 Men and a Baby, 12 Monkeys, Star Wars, The Nutty Professor, Fatal Attraction, 3:10 to Yuma, Munich, Alien, Magnificent Seven, Casino Royale, The Maltese Falcon, The Ring, Scent of a Woman, Cape Fear etc. were remakes?
Ok... 'Star Wars' / '12 Monkeys' were remakes, how, exactly? Please don't say 'Hidden Fortress' or 'La Jette'. 12 Monkeys was based on the idea of La Jette, but was a totally different story in every way. As for Star Wars...
quote:These are movies we grew up with them in the 80's and 90's to today thinking they were original as now i found out that they were remakes. They introduced us of our generations to stories and ideas or films we couldn't get easy or privy access to.
The internet has changed all that. Any teen nowadays can simply visit a site and get a list of everything they 'should' watch from past and present, and all the films are readily available. If you believe remakes are to introduce films to a new generation, then their purpose has ceased. However, in reality remakes are studios cashing in on property's they already own the rights to. Sometimes they do it before they lose copyright to someone else.
quote:everyone should understand that remakes are NOT suppose to ruin childhoods but are made to reintroduce movies, stories and ideas to new generations.
See above. Plus I think you give Hollywood, which is a business above all else, too much credit.
quote:Shooting down a remake for simply being a remake is WRONG in my view.
I don't think anyone was doing that. Valley is right that there have been a lot of direct remakes in the last ten years, the majority of which have been mediocre to just plain bad. If there is a film he loves due to be remade, it would make sense to at least be somewhat skeptical. Especially since whatever a person loves about a movie will usually disappear in a remake (this is less true of Horror, where there a fewer emotional connections to individual characters, and the movies are judged more on scares). I'd imagine he'll judge the end product on it's own merits. But there is logic to saying that some movies simply don't need to be remade. There is nothing about cinematic techniques today that would make a film better than, say, 25 years ago. 'The Thing from Another World' needed to be remade, 'The Thing' doesn't.
quote:I don't think it's a common mantra, afterall Batman has been reinvented recently thanks to Christopher Nolan. I think Burton is a genius but Nolan reinvented the superhero genre. Heath Ledger's Joker made everyone forget about Jack Nicholson, the new batmobile made me forget about the old batmobile.
I think the guy who said that has never read comics. Nolan didn't "reinvent" the superhero genre at all. He simply went to graphic novel sources like 'Batman: Year One' for his movies. Burton's Batman was a hell of a lot more daring in '89 than 'Batman Begins' was in 2005. There have been a glut of superhero movies in the last 10 years, and not to knock Nolan's films, but they are usually cash-cows when based on well-known characters (and not ruined by cgi): Iron Man; Spiderman; X-Men; Batman; Fantastic Four; Superman - they all made tons of money. We even have Green Lantern, Thor, Captain America and the Avengers yet to come, not to mention the new Spiderman!
I've gone off topic, my point is; some films should be remade, some films shouldn't be, some films can be remade, some films can't be. But studios are colour-blind to any of that - good or bad idea - if they think there's money there - it's gets signed off.
Posts: 3383 | From: England | Registered: May 2003 | Site Updates: 21
| IP: Logged |
quote:logan.. I kinda view remakes and sequels a bit different.
That was kind of the point I was making. It seems to me that studios already have the tools they need to make new movies with pre-existing pre-owned characters, but they don't (didn't) seem to do it much. As you say - windows. Most are gone now.
Posts: 3383 | From: England | Registered: May 2003 | Site Updates: 21
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm thinking more of the producers that gave the remakes a greenlight.
Love or Money? How about both?
When 1988's The Blob came out, I caught a small interview with Jack Harris, who had produced both the earlier movie as well as the new one (and many other films in the interim), and he was very excited about the new version as it allowed them to do some things that they had wanted to do in the Steve McQueen movie but were unable to. Most remakes I'm very leery of, but certainly Harris' energy was infectious, and he seemed genuinely happy to have a second chance at doing the movie.
Posts: 32 | From: Monroeville Mall | Registered: Nov 2009 | Site Updates: 0
| IP: Logged |
posted
Watched this one tonight - it's available for instant watch on netflix right now. I thought it was a pretty fun movie! Kevin dillon's mullet was pretty much to die for I have loved Shawnee smith in everything I've seen her in, and this was no exception. The movie within the movie was great too. Was this a flop when it was originally released? I don't remember hearing much about it.
Posts: 731 | From: Racine, WI | Registered: Dec 2003 | Site Updates: 0
| IP: Logged |
Muffy Tepperman
Leopard-print Leotard Wearer.....
Member # 1551
Awesome flick.....haha I too loved Shawnee....and Kevin Dillon that mullet is a riot.....and the goo was done pretty well....I liked that every killing was unique! haha
Don't forgot scary Donovan Leitch....like I say "those scary eyes, those scary eyes"
Posts: 2912 | Registered: Jun 2003 | Site Updates: 26
| IP: Logged |
Valley Dated Julie From 'Valley Girl' (allegedly!)
Member # 1322
posted
Muffy.. did you ever watch "The In Crowd"? I think it might just change your impression of Donovan Leitch.
Posts: 7845 | From: Smiling and glancing in awe in the back of a limo | Registered: Mar 2003 | Site Updates: 22
| IP: Logged |
posted
Recently saw "The Blob '88" for the very first time....can't believe I missed it for all these years, since it was an amazing horror flick! The story was solid, and the effects were superb! Definitely some of the best effects I've ever seen in a horror film from this era, and IMHO far better than some of the CGI crap that we've seen in later films...I was impressed by not only the Blob itself, but the scenes when it "ate" people - quite grotesque...
Though some may disagree with me on this, I find this '88 film far superior to the original 1950's version. Not only because of the far better effects, but the explanation of having the Blob be a result of a biological warfare experiment gone wrong is more interesting than the idea of a meteor falling from outer space....
It was also cool to notice a lot of familiar faces in this movie:
Candy Clark played the waitress in the diner; she was also in American Graffiti (1973).
The actor who played the arrogant officer also played an arrogant doctor on the TV series ER...
I chuckled when seeing Jack Nance playing an officious doctor in the hospital scene; I can't see him without thinking of his quirky characters in David Lynch's Eraserhead & Twin Peaks Posts: 400 | Registered: Sep 2016 | Site Updates: 0
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since my last post in this thread...5 years ago...Damn! I have since upgraded and bought this on Blu-Ray. And I am totally with you Nostalgic in saying the '88 remake is way better than the original. This actually still ranks in my Top 5 favorite remakes of all-time.
Posts: 1802 | From: Planet Druidia | Registered: Jan 2009 | Site Updates: 3
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
