He Hurt You So Bad You Could Never Love Again
Hollywood seems adamant to profit from remakes and sequels that moving-picture show makers take no business writing, producing or releasing. Rather than working difficult to generate new films — ones with novel plot devices, leads and stories from underrepresented communities and compelling cinematic visions, for case — the bigwigs of the American film industry are on a mission to speedily ruin any remnant of millennial childhood nostalgia.
So, it is with a heavy eye — and in recognition that Jan 10, 2022, marks six years since the passing of the absolutely legendary and unequalled David Bowie — that I am forced to address the proclamation of a Labyrinth sequel. At present, does the original film require, necessitate or fifty-fifty hint at a sequel? Is the lead histrion from the original picture show prepared to make an appearance? Is the original director even so bachelor? The answer to these questions is a single, resounding "NO." And yet, here nosotros are. Sigh.
Allow me to take a cursory moment to discuss why a Labyrinth sequel is an awful, terrible, no-good thought.
A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Will Exist a Travesty
The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, information technology'southward going to be missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin King — a.k.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-angle stone star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His declining wellness was a well-kept secret, and fans and admirers from all over the world mourned his untimely passing.
If you believe that Bowie's absence from a Labyrinth sequel is more a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the unabridged project, I'd recommend that y'all go back and lookout man the original 1986 moving-picture show. Bowie's presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and cool charismatic demeanor — the human also wrote and performed more than than half of the flick's soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform as Jareth is much like watching him as Ziggy Stardust. It 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 be himself. Even as an adult, information technology's difficult to watch Jareth the Goblin Rex prance, trip the light fantastic toe and sing without occasionally stopping to think, "Wow. That actually is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Dance the Magic Dance' down my hallway."
I'grand sorry, but it's impossible for a casting director to find a multitalented actor/musician to fill Bowie'south shoes in an upcoming sequel. It's too a claiming to imagine any viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would have suddenly changed form. This type of defoliation just deepens when considering what might go of the Labyrinth's 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 fourth dimension without impressive CGI graphics, he was one of the become-to guys for applied special effects. Sadly, Henson passed away in 1990. Since that time, in that location have been no less than 5 theatrical releases with his charming Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.
Some might take those movies equally a sign that Henson'due south absence is no big bargain when attempting to make a sequel. They would exist incredibly incorrect. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would be like a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't yous cartel, 20th Century Flim-flam!) Just stop thinking about information technology and appreciate this magic for what information technology is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth motion picture without using Henson'due south puppets would be like George Lucas abandoning practical puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated estimator graphics. Oh…that's already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown upwardly watching a specific film are bound to feel slighted, misunderstood or only plain cheated when that film ends up lost in technological translation.
Not convinced that fans don't want a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Take a look at how The Panthera leo King fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "live-activeness"' Disney remake. Here's a spoiler: They didn't like information technology.
A Project Fueled by Profits, Non Passions
All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives light-green-lighting then many '80s remakes and sequels right now?" Unfortunately, the reply lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics have long studied consumer behavior, and it seems that recent studies take not fallen on deaf ears.
In 2014, the Journal of Consumer Enquiry published findings on the connection between nostalgia and coin-spending habits. They discovered that people are more than willing to spend money when they're feeling sentimental or nostalgic. Advertizement executives and film producers have taken this tidbit of data and run with it.
That's why our current film manufacture is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, particularly to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are now full-fledged adults with existential dread about the time to come as climate change, pandemics and political chaos exit generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.
But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (think Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the pic industry would rather take existing intellectual property and rebrand it for the younger generation. In most cases, the result is an alienated original audience and a disinterested youth. This is all done in the name of and for the sake of profit.
So Please, Leave This Precious stone of a Picture Alone
A motion picture shouldn't exist pre-judged as good or bad, of course, only should instead be judged by its merit, reception and lasting affect. Nonetheless, fifty-fifty the most advanced hologram applied science could not revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD It). And no corporeality of CGI could supersede the authenticity and wonder of Henson's creations.
The just thing that could remain consequent 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'south no word from the aging Brit as to his possible interest in writing a sequel.
Every bit a result, at that place's little hope that a Labyrinth 2 would exist anything more than a shameless, soulless cash grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger globe that lay before them during the '80s. Whatsoever project based on turn a profit, non passion, is doomed to neglect, and that's why I'grand non looking frontward to the mess of a sequel that undoubtedly lies alee.
Source: https://www.ask.com/entertainment/labyrinth-sequel-bad-idea?utm_content=params%3Ao%3D740004%26ad%3DdirN%26qo%3DserpIndex
0 Response to "He Hurt You So Bad You Could Never Love Again"
Post a Comment