Nothing Bads Ever Gonna Happen Again
Hollywood seems determined to turn a profit from remakes and sequels that movie makers have no business 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 motion-picture show industry are on a mission to apace ruin any remnant of millennial babyhood nostalgia.
Then, 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 annunciation of a Labyrinth sequel. Now, does the original pic require, necessitate or even hint at a sequel? Is the lead thespian from the original movie prepared to make an appearance? Is the original director still available? The answer to these questions is a single, resounding "NO." And notwithstanding, here we are. Sigh.
Allow 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's going to be missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin Male monarch — a.k.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-bending rock star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His failing health 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 claiming than a reason to abolish the unabridged project, I'd recommend that y'all go back and lookout man the original 1986 motion-picture show. Bowie's presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and cool charismatic demeanor — the man also wrote and performed more than than one-half of the picture's soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform as Jareth is much like watching him equally Ziggy Stardust. It can exist challenging to divide the truth from the fiction of these performances, as Bowie becomes and then engrossed in his characterization that he simply ceases to be himself. Even every bit an adult, it's difficult to spotter Jareth the Goblin King prance, dance and sing without occasionally stopping to think, "Wow. That really is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Dance the Magic Dance' downwardly my hallway."
I'chiliad sorry, only it's impossible for a casting managing director to find a multitalented thespian/musician to make full Bowie's shoes in an upcoming sequel. It's likewise a claiming to imagine any viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin Rex would have suddenly inverse form. This blazon of confusion only deepens when considering what might get of the Labyrinth's creatures.
The Absence of Jim Henson'south Creative Genius
Jim Henson, the mastermind behind the Muppets, directed the original Labyrinth picture. 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 become-to guys for practical special effects. Sadly, Henson passed abroad in 1990. Since that fourth dimension, there have been no less than five theatrical releases with his charming Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.
Some might accept those movies every bit a sign that Henson's absence is no big bargain when attempting to make a sequel. They would exist incredibly wrong. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would be similar a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you dare, 20th Century Fox!) Just end thinking about it and appreciate this magic for what it is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth pic 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'southward already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown up watching a specific film are bound to feel slighted, misunderstood or just plain cheated when that motion picture ends up lost in technological translation.
Non convinced that fans don't desire a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Take a wait at how The Lion Male monarch fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "live-activity"' Disney remake. Hither's a spoiler: They didn't like it.
A Project Fueled by 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 respond lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics have long studied consumer behavior, and it seems that recent studies have non 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 money when they're feeling sentimental or cornball. Advertizing executives and picture show producers have taken this tidbit of information and run with it.
That's why our current flick industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, particularly to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are now total-fledged adults with existential dread near the future every bit climate change, pandemics and political chaos 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 picture show manufacture would rather have existing intellectual belongings and rebrand it for the younger generation. In most cases, the result is an alienated original audience and a disinterested youth. This is all washed in the name of and for the sake of profit.
Then Please, Get out This Gem of a Picture Alone
A flick shouldn't be pre-judged as skillful or bad, of course, but should instead be judged past its merit, reception and lasting impact. Still, even the most avant-garde hologram technology could not revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD It). And no amount of CGI could replace the authenticity and wonder of Henson's creations.
The only thing that could remain consistent between the original Labyrinth movie and its proposed sequel is its main screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). Just as of this moment, there'due south no word from the aging Brit every bit to his possible involvement in writing a sequel.
As a effect, at that place'southward little hope that a Labyrinth two would be anything more than a shameless, soulless cash grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger earth that lay before them during the '80s. Any project based on turn a profit, not passion, is doomed to fail, and that's why I'yard 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 "Nothing Bads Ever Gonna Happen Again"
Post a Comment