Tin the Spammers!

I've had to start deleting and reposting old posts because of spam 'comments' for some marketing thing. I really don't want to start moderating comments, but I'll probably have to start if this continues.

I noticed today a big piece on the Rep Experiment's experiment in the Irish Times. No reviews yet though.

The other night after 'Platonov', I joined cast and crew for a drink in Sin E. A good, and late (for a school night), night, but, though I had relatively little to drink, I suffered the next day (I still have a residual headache). Surely a sign of age. That or bad beer. To compound matters, in an hour or two I head off to Will from work's house for a rugby party. An opportunity for him to show off his HD tv, it should be a good night. I dread my head in the morning though.

Earlier I was reading about upcoming movies and discovered my anti-remake fervour growing. What right has Rob Zombie, a man of impeccably bad taste (I am not a fan of his torture porn rubbish), to remake Carpenter's 'Halloween'? Carpenter why can't you put a stop to this kind of travesty? You already let them ruin your 'The Fog' with your blessing? Don't ruin all our fondly held illusions! Stop this! Well, too late, it's made, and riding high in the U.S. charts too. Damn it though, can't they have some respect!

The only 'remake' I was vaguely intrigued by was Kenneth Branagh's upcoming 'Sleuth', with Michael Caine, who appeared in the original opposite Laurence Olivier, now taking on the Olivier role against Jude Law. The original was terrific, but then it was a stage play, and reinterpretations are the norm with theatre. This time around though Harold Pinter, no less, has 'adapted' Schaffer's original play. I am troubled.

Before the posts start flying I am aware of the double standards evinced in that last paragraph. Why should theatre stage 'remakes', while I rail at cinema for doing the same thing. I have no defence. The film industry is free to do what it wishes, just as I am free not to go to see any remake. Movies though are more permanent than theatre; a film lasts. And a masterpiece made forty years ago can still be enjoyed today (unlike your average stage performance). One would not 'remake' a Rembrandt, but then I suppose one couldn't by defintion. When I think of it though, I have seen reinterpretations of famous paintings. They are new works obviously, but inasmuch as they contribute to the cult of the original piece, they affect our perceptions of that original work. In my heart, I know it boils down to a personal taste. I love ccertain films and am insulted to think someone believes they can remake them as something better.