|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
03-11-2009, 06:40 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
X: The Man with the X-Ray Eyes to be remade
Spanish helmer Juan Carlos Fresnadillo has made a deal with MGM to develop a film based on director Roger Corman's 1963 pic "X: The Man With the X-Ray Eyes," a movie from the Lion's library.
The original starred Ray Milland as a scientist who is near a breakthrough in X-ray vision technology when his funding is cut off. Desperate to show results, the doc applies eye drops that eventually cause him to lose control over his growing powers. Mandeville Films partners David Hoberman and Todd Lieberman will produce with Enrique Lopez Lavigne. Lou Arkoff will exec produce. The director hasn't committed to a film since "28 Weeks Later." Fresnadillo is in Hollywood this week meeting with writers for "X" and is expected to set one quickly.
__________________
"If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche 
|
|
#2
03-12-2009, 01:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
No comment from either NE or Doc?
Uncanny...
__________________
"If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
#3
03-12-2009, 01:14 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hmm... Never saw the original, but the usual vague humor about it has passed my ear. Old campy movies of the such seem to do well with people when watched today, but remaking them always leaves this bad vibe, not to mention that it's a waste of money in the long run. I mean, where is the decent profit for remaking a story without any general hope of public interest.
You never hear anyone say, "Hey, remember the man with the x-ray eyes?"
__________________
There isn't a day that goes by where I don't think about you... as a horde of mindless zombies. 
|
|
#4
03-12-2009, 06:58 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
You're not around here much then. X-The Man With X-Ray Eyes is a highly regarded classic. Get some friends who know more about classic horror.
Ray Milland is great in this film. I'm sure this remake will be the standard remake drek.
__________________
Lee Widener, Author Website  Cartoon Artwork, Underground Art, Other Weird Stuff 
|
|
#5
03-12-2009, 07:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
and i hope people dont choose their friends by their knowledge of old Corman flicks. i think this is one of the better candidates for a remake .. if for nothing else than to inform as least a few younger folk that there is an older version of the film (which would probably get a re-release as a result of a remake)
|
|
#6
03-12-2009, 08:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Assfaces. Sperm-for-brains failuremonkeys.
__________________
Horror and Bizarro novelist and editor
|
|
#8
03-13-2009, 05:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
it always makes far more sense to reseve judgement until after the final product has been seen.
i protested the Dawn of the Dead remake ... saw it - enjoyed it - ate my words. i honestly dont get the remake tears .. it'll be good or it wont. just like every other film made. origionality is a fucking hard thing to find after a couple of centuries of stories being told, after years and years of bands releasing albums, after decades of films being made. piss and moan after the movie turns out to be crap - not before.
|
|
#9
03-13-2009, 05:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Its difficult to be objective about a remake of a film thats important to you, but you're certainly right about them generating interest in the originals. I remember when Wicker Man was going to be redone and whinged about it (correctly as it turned out) but it encouraged me revisit the original again. Im pretty sure there were plenty who saw the first thanks to the remake, so it can be a good thing.
__________________
  Battle Royalty, 2009 @Wolf_Scousemac
|
 |
|
|
