The President Is Missing Is Getting Bad Reviews

Photo Courtesy: Henson Associates, Inc./IMDb

Hollywood seems adamant to turn a profit from remakes and sequels that movie makers have no business organization writing, producing or releasing. Rather than working hard to generate new films — ones with novel plot devices, leads and stories from underrepresented communities and compelling cinematic visions, for example — the bigwigs of the American film industry are on a mission to apace ruin whatsoever remnant of millennial childhood nostalgia.

So, information technology is with a heavy heart — and in recognition that Jan 10, 2022, marks six years since the passing of the absolutely legendary and incomparable David Bowie — that I am forced to address the annunciation of a Labyrinth sequel. Now, does the original motion-picture show crave, necessitate or even hint at a sequel? Is the lead actor from the original motion-picture show prepared to make an appearance? Is the original manager still bachelor? The respond to these questions is a single, resounding "NO." And nevertheless, here we are. Sigh.

Permit me to have a brief moment to discuss why a Labyrinth sequel is an awful, terrible, no-skillful thought.

A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Will Be a Travesty

The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, it'south going to be missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin Male monarch — a.k.a. the unequalled David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-bending rock star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His declining health was a well-kept clandestine, and fans and admirers from all over the globe mourned his untimely passing.

Photo Courtesy: Henson Associates, Inc./IMDb

If yous believe that Bowie's absenteeism from a Labyrinth sequel is more a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the entire project, I'd recommend that you get back and watch the original 1986 film. Bowie's presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and cool charismatic demeanor — the man besides wrote and performed more than half of the film's soundtrack.

Seeing Bowie perform as Jareth is much similar watching him as Ziggy Stardust. It tin can exist challenging to separate the truth from the fiction of these performances, as Bowie becomes so engrossed in his characterization that he but ceases to be himself. Even every bit an adult, information technology'due south difficult to watch Jareth the Goblin Rex prance, dance and sing without occasionally stopping to think, "Wow. That really is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Dance the Magic Dance' down my hallway."

I'k sorry, but it'southward impossible for a casting director to observe a multitalented actor/musician to fill Bowie'south shoes in an upcoming sequel. It's as well a challenge to imagine whatever viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would have of a sudden changed form. This type of confusion only deepens when considering what might go of the Labyrinth's creatures.

Jim Henson, the mastermind backside the Muppets, directed the original Labyrinth motion-picture show. His masterful puppetry showed a depth of skill unmatched past rival puppeteers, and in a time without impressive CGI graphics, he was one of the go-to guys for practical special effects. Sadly, Henson passed away in 1990. Since that time, there have been no less than five theatrical releases with his mannerly Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.

Photo Courtesy: Henson Associates, Inc./IMDb

Some might take those movies equally a sign that Henson'due south absence is no large deal when attempting to make a sequel. They would exist incredibly incorrect. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would exist like a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you dare, 20th Century Fox!) Simply stop thinking about it and appreciate this magic for what it is!

Making a sequel to the Labyrinth film without using Henson's puppets would exist like George Lucas abandoning practical puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated computer graphics. Oh…that's already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown upward watching a specific film are bound to feel slighted, misunderstood or just evidently cheated when that film ends upwardly lost in technological translation.

Non convinced that fans don't desire a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Take a expect at how The Lion Rex fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "live-action"' Disney remake. Here's a spoiler: They didn't like it.

A Projection Fueled past Profits, Not Passions

All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives green-lighting so many '80s remakes and sequels right at present?" Unfortunately, the answer lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics have long studied consumer beliefs, and it seems that recent studies have not fallen on deafened ears.

Photograph Courtesy: Stanley Bielecki Movie Collection/Getty Images

In 2014, the Journal of Consumer Research published findings on the connexion between nostalgia and coin-spending habits. They discovered that people are more willing to spend money when they're feeling sentimental or nostalgic. Advertizement executives and film producers accept taken this tidbit of information and run with it.

That's why our current film industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, peculiarly to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are now full-fledged adults with existential dread about the future equally climate change, pandemics and political anarchy go out generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.

But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (think Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the motion-picture show industry would rather take existing intellectual holding and rebrand it for the younger generation. In most cases, the result is an alienated original audience and a disinterested youth. This is all done in the proper name of and for the sake of profit.

So Delight, Leave This Gem of a Motion picture Alone

A movie shouldn't be pre-judged as good or bad, of course, merely should instead be judged past its merit, reception and lasting impact. Still, fifty-fifty the most advanced hologram technology could non revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD It). And no amount of CGI could replace the authenticity and wonder of Henson's creations.

Photo Courtesy: TriStar/Getty Images

The just thing that could remain consequent between the original Labyrinth flick and its proposed sequel is its main screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). Merely equally of this moment, there'south no word from the crumbling Brit as to his possible involvement in writing a sequel.

Every bit a issue, there's little hope that a Labyrinth two would exist annihilation more than a shameless, soulless cash grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger world that lay before them during the '80s. Whatever project based on turn a profit, non passion, is doomed to fail, and that'southward why I'm not looking forward to the mess of a sequel that undoubtedly lies alee.

thorpedisser.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ask.com/entertainment/labyrinth-sequel-bad-idea?utm_content=params%3Ao%3D740004%26ad%3DdirN%26qo%3DserpIndex

0 Response to "The President Is Missing Is Getting Bad Reviews"

Post a Comment

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel