Slashdot Mirror
Sunshine Writer Joins Logan's Run Remake
bowman9991 writes "Remember to check your palm to ensure that your crystal hasn't gone black. If it has, you better start running. The 1976 science fiction classic Logan's Run, starring Michael York, is being remade in 3-D with British writer Alex Garland now onboard to write the screenplay. Garland's film Sunshine, directed by Danny Boyle, was one of the stand-out science fiction films of the last decade, and he wrote the screenplays for Leonardo DiCaprio's The Beach (based on Garland's own novel) and the science fiction horror 28 Days Later (a massive adrenaline rush of a movie). This should give first-time director Carl Rinsch some great material to work with — a great premise meets a great writer."
Logan's Run is a classic in every sense and, in my opinion, shouldn't be fucked with. Still, if someone HAS to do it, the guy that wrote Sunshine (which was a modern day masterpiece) is certainly a good choice.
Living With a Nerd
There's nothing in Logan's Run that needs 3D. Are they going to do weird bullet-time Matrix-like effects of the needlers and rippers flying around?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I like the original Logan's Run, and it's a good story, but I don't think it's a classic. It could be remade as a better film.
You're not going to add a damn thing to the original. Why not tell a whole new story and add something to the culture?
And what's with all the love for Sunshine? The premise sounded like another typical, tedious, scientifically illiterate Hollywood movie all the way down to the secret killer, crew getting picked off one by one, and impossibly large plot holes. How was it not awful?
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
The Island (2005) was already a remake. I was pissed because in LR you got to see tits. Not so with Scarlett Johansson. Damn Hollywood.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
It doesn't work right if Carousel is in 2d; it has to be 3d!
I'd read the book first, and IMHO, they really fsck'ed up the movie. The gun was MUCH cooler in the novel (I'd like to see how they do the 'Homer' fired out of it), and much more riveting, and character development was better as you saw Logan change through his run. That and the Sandmen were badasses, trained in all sorts of arts, like a Jason Bourne type in abilities.
At least...go back to the age limit of 21 (not 30), and for God's sake...don't do the stupid carousel thing they made up for the movie.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
The original novel came out at the height of the baby boom hitting adulthood; across the developing world, the population explosion was making it look like the whole world was kids. (Erlich's "The Population Bomb" was just out, too.) So they had this world where you were shot at 20, there were only teenagers. How the high-tech machinery kept running was never explained.
The movie raised the 20 to 30 to accommodate a not-nearly-teen Michael York. Who kept the lights on was still never explained; everybody seemed to lounge about in day-glo party clothes.
Of course, it was terrible science fiction; many analysts were pointing to dropping birth rates in the developed world and debunking Erlich even at the time. The youth explosion of the decade was a blip. Now the world faces an increasingly aging population and it's the loss of 50-somethings from the workforce that is creating concerns.
Apparently, they are good at keeping the lights on.
They will subtract the nudity. NSFW. These were the best stills I could find. They look a lot better on the giant silver screen:
http://www.moviesnxs.com/web/thumbnails/tn-Jenny-Agutter_logans-run_25-02-06.jpg
http://rarevideos.bravepages.com/JennyAgutter@Walkabout.JPG
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PWR3w2VkSZs/SNAbQiLWStI/AAAAAAAAA7s/2mxn62WhWWY/s400/JennyAgutterLogansRun.jpg
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
The best part was the ending, when grandpa became a zombie, and the little girl was revealed to be a gray alien.
They don't need to make it, it's Ben Dune (been done)
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
There is another reason to NOT make this movie. It doesn't make any sense, from a historical perspective, to do so. Back when the book was written, the world was concerned about the population explosion, and that it seemed the average age was going YOUNGER. There were going to be a bunch of young people around and no way to support them. The way it's worked out, however, is that the population has actually gotten OLDER. There are many more older folks now, as a percentage of the population. Overpopulation also has not become as large a problem as anyone thought. If we could figure out food DISTRIBUTION, then there wouldn't be anyone going to bed hungry.
And, yeah, "The Island" kind of already was a remake, albeit a lousy one.
The original, goofy as it was, is a classic, and they won't be able to add anything of substance.
Everything you know is wrong, Just forget the words and sing along.
They're still working on making sure there's an equivalent of Top Gun for every profession:
... etc.
Why can't the solar physicists get an unrealistic movie that makes them seem cool, too?
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
The Director's Commentary on the DVD (probably the Blu-Ray as well) notes that they did consult with scientists to be as scientifically accurate as possible.. but also noted specifically the float-in-space-and-you-freeze as an example where they went for visual and story-telling appeal, rather than for scientific accuracy; pointing out that it really doesn't matter much that you wouldn't lose heat that quickly.. you can't hold your breath for more than a few minutes anyway and then you'd die from asphyxiation.
So yes, maybe the same piss-poor treatment of science would be in this one, too... if they believe that visual/story-telling appeal takes precedence.
God no, the cheesiest of the MGM sci-fi movies of the 1970s. I think the only reason why people remember it fondly is the fap factor. Jenny Agutter and Farrah Fawcett. In shiny toga-like Dacron mini-dresses.
However, as others have pointed out downthread, the book was actually way better than the movie and the even cheesier 1-season-wonder TV series told it. Maybe now it will be finally done justice, like Ridley Scott will probably do with Brave New World.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Garland's film 'Sunshine,' directed by Danny Boyle, was one of the stand-out science fiction films of the last decade,
Stand out in what way?
It was a commercial flop, it was boring, it had a ridiculous plot, it had horrible acting, it had little to no character development at all. It was an all-around horrible movie from start to end as far as I'm concerned, and most of the movie-going public seems to agree with me.