> In article news.xmission.com>,
> glenzabr@xmission.com (GMAN) wrote:
>

>> In article <180720081621487139%%anybody@anywhere-anytime.com>, Anybody
>> anywhere-anytime.com> wrote:

>>>In article news.evilcabal.org>, "Wickeddoll®"
>>>yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>

>>>> "Anybody"
>>>> "Wickeddoll®"

>>>>>> "GeneK" ...

>>>>>>> "Kweeg" wrote...

>>>>>>>> I will not condemn it *before* I've even seen it.

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same here. It's a lot easier and way more fun to
>>>>>>> condemn something when you've seen it and can
>>>>>>> actually describe all of its faults.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> GeneK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

>>>>>> Yup. They may surprise us all. I thought I would hate the Michael
>>>>>> Keaton
>>>>>> Batman movies, but I loved them. There are many other examples I
>>>>>> could
>>>>>> cite, but you get my drift.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if I recall correctly, the Lord Of The Rings fans were outraged
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> anyone was trying to film the "unfilmable" classic. Um... they were
>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>> (though I don't care for LOTR)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Natalie

>>>>>
>>>>> That's not really the same concept. Making a movie from a book is
>>>>> different to changing an established movie / TV franchise ... although
>>>>> both do almost always make ridiculous changes.

>>>

>>
>> Yup, look at Red Dawn, and next a remake of Robocop. What next, Ghostbusters?

>
> Yes, they're pushing Ghostbusters 3 at Comic-Con next week.
>
> Really.