|
Post by Clouseau on Jul 14, 2006 19:35:40 GMT
i suppose that's where we differ then, Cato... while i do love the originals (or most of them), i figure as long as there's a way to make it amusing and fresh, i don't mind the fact that they're really just trying to do the same thing differently...
it's the same for me as with the James Bond films... IMO, the Connery films were the best - the first three, particularly - and the rest have never come terribly close to recreating that magic, BUT as long as they keep finding a way to keep it fresh, i don't mind that they're really just trying to do the same thing differently...
some of the Bond films have been absolutely horrible, IMHO, but i still come back to see the next one, hoping it'll be better, and i never complain when they announce a new one is coming... and that's the way i feel about the Panther films: while some of them have been terrible, terrible, terrible, i still want to see what they're gonna come out with next!
that's not to say that i'm a fan of every remake/sequel that comes along (especially as many bad ones as Hollywood's cranked out lately!) - even if it's for a film where i was a fan of the original - but there are just certain concepts/franchises that i never seem to get sick of, know what i mean?
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 16, 2006 12:25:49 GMT
I agree with Cato....it's not criticism to Steve Martin personally or rehasing the series or whatever. My criticism won't change if it was a story based on a new character in a different scenario etc..Just like any other film...if it's not original, creative, inspiring or anything different, then it's not worth the time...just like the PP06 movie, Steve Martin did great, I appreciate his reinterpretation, but it was almost like the producers or people behind it were trying too hard to make it what it was before..
Needless to say though, if this very same movie had a different name, characters, etc I'm sure my criticism wouldn't change though..The difference would be my opinion that "this is too much like the pink panther movies" haha
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Jul 19, 2006 16:55:05 GMT
i guess some people will be disappointed no matter what they do...
how's that old saying go? "you can't please all of the people all of the time"...
*shrug*
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorGas on Aug 16, 2006 3:29:42 GMT
I liked the idea of another movie. I have been frustrated with the failed attempts, but overall enjoyed this one. Hopefully the pacing will be better in the sequel. I wish all PP fans could enjoy this movie as much as I did.
|
|
|
Post by Dreyfus on Aug 16, 2006 19:15:02 GMT
I did enjoy the first and it was a step up from the PP film berfore it. I'm not sure if it was needed but I liked it.
|
|
|
Post by georgelytton on Aug 17, 2006 9:07:46 GMT
Can I ask - if Martin isn't Clouseau, why be Clouseau, at all?
Wouldn't it be the same if the reboot just didn't have ANY of the characters of the original series? Like, no Clouseau, no Dreyfus? Just the Pink Panther diamond, and you create new characers from there.
I mean, the Bond movies, for all that can be argued, had continuity - slim, but they had it. Sean Connery and Roger Moore were the SAME Bond, despite the interpretation.
Sellers as fellow Cato explained, poccessed such GENIUS while playing that role (even when bored with it, like in REVENGE), it made the performance unique. Like with Dr. Strangelove, Sellers MADE Clouseau what it is. There wasn't a script bibe that said "this is how Clouseau acts, and this is what makes him work etc." Both Sellers AND Edwards created the character, on the set. In both PANTHER and SHOT.
For me, Martin playing Clouseau is ultimately pointless, and another exercize of Martin's "Hey, look, I can play Clouseau!". And the thing is, what made Clouseau work was, despite his idiocu and eccentricity and selfishness, you found him likeable and you rooted for him. I never liked Martin's Clouseau - never once did I root for him. I was actually GLAD when Dreyfus humiliated him, made me feel very happy. And when THAT happens, somethings not right.
I just hate Martin's re-imagining of Clouseau. Now, I can understand why Edwards never seeked to replace Sellers after his death - look at the results, almost 30 years later!
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Aug 17, 2006 12:56:28 GMT
Can I ask - if Martin isn't Clouseau, why be Clouseau, at all? Wouldn't it be the same if the reboot just didn't have ANY of the characters of the original series? Like, no Clouseau, no Dreyfus? Just the Pink Panther diamond, and you create new characers from there. ... I just hate Martin's re-imagining of Clouseau. i think the best answer is another question... would it have been any more "bearable" for you if Steve Martin's character had not been named Clouseau, and the only thing in common between this film and the previous was the existence of the Pink Panther diamond? or would you then still have been crying about how it doesn't have anything to do with the previous films except the diamond, which you'd still claim was just an attempt to make money off the earlier films' name?? i get the impression there's no way you would have liked it, no matter what they did... Now, I can understand why Edwards never seeked to replace Sellers after his death - look at the results, almost 30 years later! now there i think you're in error... if you look in the threads about Romance and the Ferret, there are conflicting sources that claim that either Blake Edwards or MGM/UA approached Dudley Moore about replacing Peter Sellers as Clouseau (thankfully, he declined)... but you can't tell me that Ted Wass and Roberto Benigni weren't intended to be "replacements" for Sellers... they even went so far as to try to call Benigni's character Inspector Jacques Clouseau midway through Son, and there were talks on and off for years afterwards to do another film with Benigni at helm (which also, thankfully, never happened)... i would much rather watch TPP06 than Trail, Curse, or Son almost anytime!
|
|
weaser
Ant
A BAYHEMB???!!
Posts: 7
|
Post by weaser on Aug 26, 2006 23:09:07 GMT
I LIKED the 2006 remake. Sue me. Sure, Martin's not Sellers, for which, I'm sure, the producers are happy, considering Peter's tendancies to tantrums.
Still, I liked it, not as much as "Shot in the Dark", but a heck of a lot more than Alan Arkin's version.
|
|
|
Post by panther67 on Jul 31, 2008 14:51:20 GMT
Hi,
I am new here, and recently bought all the PP movies on DVD. Yes, I had seen probably all the Sellers movies on TV, and one at the drive-in in the 70's.
I did recently see for the 1st time, the non Sellers PP films. I did not fully watch the Arkin film yet, maybe half of it so far. Arkin's character reminds me of Borat, and I actually think the actor that does Borat would have done a good Clouseau.
I think the Martin PP movie was not bad at all. It was not great, and you can't watch these movies with the mind of trying to compare Martin and Sellers, they are 2 different people.
I must say I think the Martin PP film was better than Trail, Curse, and Son. The last real Sellers PP was revenge. Trail was basically one last milking of Sellers name and image, and also was a blatant set-up for Curse. And Wass just didn't cut it, and Begnini was plain insane.
So, with that in mind, Martin's film was OK. Was it "needed".... maybe not, but considering the Edwards PP movies made after Sellers' passing, I think it was a good thing, because the last PP movie now(Martin's) is a lot better than Son, and I think it's best to have the last output better than the one before it.
Carl
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Jul 31, 2008 15:48:17 GMT
hi Carl! nice to have you aboard! i think georgelytton will disagree with you about Martin's film being better than Son, but i agree with you, and i'll add that i'm hoping Martin's 2nd Panther film will be even better than his first, thus continuing the pattern of each non-Sellers Panther film being better than the one before it!
|
|
|
Post by panther67 on Jul 31, 2008 16:03:50 GMT
Thanks. Yeah, Benigni was too much like as escapee from a lunatic asylum. It was worse than Curse.
Carl
Oh, and this is a question I had about Curse. When Wass 1st sees Moore, and he says "It's you!", what did he mean by that, and then when he wanted an autograph, he gave Moore the Sellers Clouseau picture to sign. I thought that was confusing.... Like Wass was in on the situation...
Carl
|
|