How Do You Know if You Have Bad Cholesterol
Hollywood seems determined to 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 moving picture manufacture are on a mission to quickly ruin whatever remnant of millennial childhood nostalgia.
So, it is with a heavy middle — and in recognition that January 10, 2021, marks five years since the passing of the absolutely legendary and incomparable David Bowie — that I am forced to address the announcement of a Labyrinth sequel. Now, does the original film require, necessitate or even hint at a sequel? Is the pb actor from the original pic prepared to make an advent? Is the original director nevertheless available? The answer to these questions is a unmarried, resounding "NO." And notwithstanding, here nosotros are. Sigh.
Permit me to take a brief moment to discuss why a Labyrinth sequel is an awful, terrible, no-skilful idea.
A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Will Be a Travesty
The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, information technology'due south going to exist missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin Male monarch — a.one thousand.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-angle rock star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His failing wellness was a well-kept secret, and fans and admirers from all over the world mourned his untimely passing.
If yous believe that Bowie'southward absence from a Labyrinth sequel is more a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the entire project, I'd recommend that you go dorsum and watch the original 1986 moving-picture show. Bowie'due south presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and cool charismatic demeanor — the man too wrote and performed more than than half of the motion picture'south soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform equally Jareth is much similar watching him as Ziggy Stardust. Information technology can exist challenging to separate the truth from the fiction of these performances, as Bowie becomes so engrossed in his characterization that he merely ceases to exist himself. Even as an adult, it's hard to watch Jareth the Goblin King prance, dance and sing without occasionally stopping to think, "Wow. That really is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Trip the light fantastic toe the Magic Dance' downward my hallway."
I'chiliad deplorable, but it's incommunicable for a casting director to notice a multitalented actor/musician to make full Bowie's shoes in an upcoming sequel. It's likewise a challenge to imagine any viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would have all of a sudden changed form. This type of confusion just deepens when considering what might go of the Labyrinth'south creatures.
Jim Henson, the mastermind behind the Muppets, directed the original Labyrinth film. His masterful puppetry showed a depth of skill unmatched by rival puppeteers, and in a time without impressive CGI graphics, he was one of the get-to guys for applied special effects. Sadly, Henson passed away in 1990. Since that time, there have been no less than 5 theatrical releases with his charming Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.
Some might accept those movies equally a sign that Henson'due south absence is no big deal when attempting to brand a sequel. They would be incredibly wrong. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would exist like a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you dare, 20th Century Flim-flam!) Merely end thinking almost it and appreciate this magic for what it is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth film without using Henson's puppets would be like George Lucas abandoning applied puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated computer graphics. Oh…that'due south already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown up watching a specific picture are jump to feel slighted, misunderstood or just patently cheated when that film ends upwardly lost in technological translation.
Non convinced that fans don't want a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Accept a await at how The Panthera leo Male monarch fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "alive-action"' Disney remake. Here'southward a spoiler: They didn't like it.
A Project Fueled by Profits, Not Passions
All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives light-green-lighting so many '80s remakes and sequels correct now?" Unfortunately, the answer lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics have long studied consumer behavior, and information technology seems that contempo studies have not fallen on deaf ears.
In 2014, the Journal of Consumer Enquiry published findings on the connection between nostalgia and money-spending habits. They discovered that people are more willing to spend coin when they're feeling sentimental or nostalgic. Advertising executives and picture show producers have taken this tidbit of information and run with it.
That'south why our electric current film industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, especially to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are now total-fledged adults with existential dread well-nigh the future as climate change, pandemics and political anarchy leave generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.
But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (recollect Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the film industry would rather accept existing intellectual property and rebrand it for the younger generation. In most cases, the result is an alienated original audition and a disinterested youth. This is all done in the name of and for the sake of profit.
So Please, Leave This Gem of a Picture Lone
A movie shouldn't be pre-judged as good or bad, of form, only should instead be judged by its merit, reception and lasting impact. Still, even the most advanced hologram technology could not revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD IT). And no amount of CGI could replace the actuality and wonder of Henson's creations.
The only affair that could remain consistent between the original Labyrinth film and its proposed sequel is its main screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). But as of this moment, there's no word from the aging Brit as to his possible interest in writing a sequel.
As a effect, in that location's piddling hope that a Labyrinth 2 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. Any projection based on turn a profit, not passion, is doomed to fail, and that'due south why I'g not looking forward to the mess of a sequel that undoubtedly lies ahead.
Source: https://www.ask.com/entertainment/labyrinth-sequel-bad-idea?utm_content=params%3Ao%3D740004%26ad%3DdirN%26qo%3DserpIndex
0 Response to "How Do You Know if You Have Bad Cholesterol"
Post a Comment