1) Jaden Smith clearly actually KNOWS martial arts, and it shows, with the climactic championship square off way more convincing than the original.
2) His character, Dre, is taught by Jackie Chan, who IS martial arts.
3) Dre’s (Smith’s character) romance with a young Chinese violinist is utterly charming.
4) Michelle Yeoh, the greatest martial arts actress in the world, has a marvelous cameo in which she engages in a staggering display of control while squaring off against a cobra.
5) For those decrying a remake as sacrilege, I would point out that kung fu being the offense of choice in China makes way more sense to me than karate being the offense of choice in southern California.
PAD
• 
Some people think remaking “The Karate Kid” is a sacrilege?
It’s THE KARATE KID, for god’s sake. They’re not remaking “Citizen Kane”.
Whether CITIZEN KANE or THE CREEPING TERROR (arguably the world’s worst film), it doesn’t matter to me. What matter is … it’s a *&$^% remake. Given the thousands of stories out there begging to be turned into film, but which probably won’t be because studios are obsessed with remakes, yeah, that annoys me to no end.
As for Michelle Yeoh, she is the indisputable mistress of martial arts (and I say this as a Lucy Liu fan) but this doesn’t mean she hasn’t had her share of turkeys (as has Liu). I’m still trying to come up with an invocation to Cthulhu to get back the time I lost watching her awful SILVER HAWK.
Agreed on Hollywood’s lack of creativity, but don’t condemn a film just because it’s a remake. Bogart’s “The Maltese Falcon” was the SECOND remake of the same story in an eleven year period (after the original The Maltese Falcon, 1931, and Satan Was A Lady, 1935, all by Warner Brothers), but it’s clearly the best version.
It may be a remake, but come one, it’s totally different from the original movie. Some average action movies have much more in common than the 1984 Karate Kid and the 2010 Karate Kid do… In the new one at least there is almost a true discovery of a new culture, he is in China, not California!!
A young inexperimented guy is trained by a master to participate in a tournament in order to defeat his nemesis : it’s the plot of both movies, but everything else being different, place, characters, etc I don’t really see it as a remake.
What I want to know is, is it still the story of a young man in desperate need of a father figure finding one in his sensei? Because that was the part of the original Karate Kid that I liked.
Even more than that, his sensei has his own issues and, through his student, reconnects with the world and the father/son dynamic.
.
PAD
I don’t think a remake is sacrilege (other than the fact that I’m just sick of remakes in general); I just wish they’d called the movie “The Kûņg-Fû Kìd” instead of “The Karate Kid.” Do the studio heads really think we’re dumb enough to NOT understand it’s a remake even if it’s called something different?
They did call the movie The Kung Fû Kìd in pretty much every market except the US… It’s “Sorcerer’s Stone” all over again…
It was originally announced with that title. When stuff happens for no reason, I usually assume there’s legal issues. Furthermore, let’s face it: If they’d called it “The Kung Fû Kìd,” the knock would have been, “Who do they think they’re fooling? Do the studio heads really think we’re dumb enough not to realize it’s a remake just by calling it something different?”
.
PAD
It seems kind of odd though. None of the characters or settings are the same right? Why call this a remake at all then?
It’s all about name recognition, Drew, that’s why.
.
That’s almost certainly why, for instance, the so-called Mission: Impossible movies have that title, despite having so little in common with Mission: Impossible. It’s much easier to link to an existing property and trade upon the goodwill afforded that property than to sell an unrelated property and potentially work against that goodwill. (“Why should I see this ‘Kung Fû Kìd’ movie that’s clearly a riff on ‘Karate Kid?'” vs “Hmmm…I liked the original ‘Karate Kid,’ so let’s see what the new one’s all about.”)
–Daryl
@Drew, None of the characters or settings are the same. However, all of the story elements and beats are the same.
I just figured he was already the Karate kid, and got his butt kicked. Now he learns Kung Fu. 😛
I quite enjoyed the film as well, although it probably could have been streamlined by about 20 minutes. Most adults can sit through a two hour-plus film, but a lot of younger kids at the screening I went to were getting a bit restless. The plot point about Dre going to China with his mom, who’s been transferred to China was a bit thin, but the stunning locations more than made up for the slightly weak way the characters got there. Casting-wise, Smith is quite good, but he seems to be getting a lot of flak for being Will Smith’s son. Frankly, I’m not sure a lot of kids that age could hold a film with so much screen time.
.
The puppy love romance was well-handled; I’m a long way from 12 years old now myself, but my memory is that it’s an uncomfortable time for kids and that seemed to come across. The young actress that co-stars with Smith did a nice job, especially when you consider there would probably be all sorts of taboos- explicit and implicit about a young Chinese girl dating an African American boy. The film sidesteps that notion by insisting that it is Dre’s irresponsible behavior that compels the parents to stop the relationship, but I’m sure most movie-goers would feel there’s more to it than that.
.
If there’s one plot point that annoyed me- and I felt this way about the original as well- it’s that I could never figure out why, if you’ve got a bunch of local kids looking for the slightest excuse to kick the crap out of you, why would you do something to REALLY piss them off? I always felt the character loses sympathy points for that one.
All I can tell you, Joe, is that Caroline–all of age 7–was captivated for the entire running time. Running time isn’t everything; I’ve seen kids get fidgety at films that were 85 minutes.
.
PAD
Michelle Yeoh is in it? Be still, my heart.
As I understand it, Jaden Smith studied and trained for quite a while in preparation. His dad seems to have instilled an admirable work ethic.
I’m looking forward seeing to this movie. It has much to recommend it.
I’ve been hearing great things about it from all angles. If I had any qualms with the title, it’s that this film doesn’t have to necessarily be seen as a remake. More than one of the Karate Kid films had this plotline, so this film could be seen as easily as another sequel as it could a remake. I think “The Karate Kid: A New Beginning” is the best sequel leaning title I could come up with, though.
.
My issue when I heard that Jaden Smith was in this role was because I remembered just how awful he was in the remake of “The Day the Earth Stood Still.” But that movie had a lot of things wrong with it. I do intend to see “The Karate Kid,” so if I like it then young Smith will get a pass for his sci-fi fiasco.
There was nothing in “The Day the Earth Stood Still” that wasn’t awful. That’s hardly the film to render judgment on anyone.
.
PAD
A child actor who’s only tests have been “The Pursuit of Happyness,” in which he was too young to really judge, and “The Day the Earth Stood Still” which was awful, and who clearly got the role because both of his parents are producers doesn’t instill confidence in me that he will necessarily do a good job. I was planning on giving “The Karate Kid” a shot anyway as I’ve been on a Jackie Chan bender for the past week (watched “Project A” last night, awesome!).
Honestly, I’d love to see Jackie Chan star in something where he wasn’t co-starring with at least one kid. I did give his recent film, “Shinjuku Incident” a shot, but in the 45 minute beginning that I saw, it came across as a bit serious and preachy compared with his usual comedy stylings.
I’d completely missed that that was Michelle Yeoh. Thank you for pointing that out.
.
One of the things I sometimes enjoy about remakes is how the same thing is sometimes approached in a very different fashion. At the best of times, the result is I get new insights into characters and events from one or both films.
.
Here, it was all about the car. It has a different role in both films. It also connects to another scene that we saw in both films, again for very different reasons.
.
Another cute touch was where Dre got to live.
.
I have to see if I can’t get together with my brother to see it again. He was the guy that introduced me to the original, so it’s only fair I convince him to give it one more try.
Bill K,
“Some people think remaking “The Karate Kid” is a sacrilege?
It’s THE KARATE KID, for god’s sake. They’re not remaking “Citizen Kane”.”
.
Please get your nose out of the air. The original “The Karate id” is considered an iconic movie by many, especially those born around 1970 who could experience it as a teen. While there have been scores of underdog movies since “Rocky”, “kid” was released only eight years after and enjoyed the same guiding hand as “Rocky”, John Avildsen. In many ways, for the generation that were teens when it came out, it was actually more relatable than “Rocky”. Instead of an over-the-hill fighter who had never reached his potential, we got to cheer for a teen who was feeling out-of-place and bullied, which virtually every teen can relate to.
Unlike this star-studded remake, the original had no bankable movie stars and enjoyed no big premiere. It was a sleeper hit and “underdog” film about an underdog that resonated with the public and transcended it’s trappings to and became a true part of the culture.
.
Instead there was magic in the performances and characters of Pat Morita,all the Cobra Kai, catchphrases like ‘wax on, wax off’ and scenes like catching flies with your chopsticks and moves like the “crane technique” that became part of people’s childhoods in a way even fantasy films or horror films did not.
.
That’s what people remember and celebrate and that’s why so many are fearful one of their childhood memories could possibly be tarnished. From here and other sources, I hear it’s a worthy successor, which is good. If not, I’ll just put copy of the soundtrack in my cassette player and relive a movie that inspired me, again and again, and still does.
and that’s why so many are fearful one of their childhood memories could possibly be tarnished
.
Alas, I’ve found an unfortunately easy way to tarnish a beloved childhood movie memory is to see the movie again as an adult. Some hold up, but for most it’s far better to replay them in my mind than before my eyes.
I view the idea of a new movie “tarnishing childhood memories” of the old one pretty much the same way as Stephen King views the idea of movie adaptations ruining his books. The old movie is still there, and so are my memories of it.
.
I’m not *that* invested in the Karate Kid, of course, but I was a pretty hardcore Transfan back in the day, and Michael Bay’s little exercises in suck haven’t ruined any of my old memories of watching the cartoon or playing with the toys. Those are fine.
The original “The Karate id” is considered an iconic movie by many, especially those born around 1970 who could experience it as a teen.
All I can say about that is that I was far, far too old to have teen memories of it when the first one came out.
More seriously, there were some fond memories in the Asian American acting community for some of the nuances that Pat Morita was allowed to bring to the role. And I’m sure there are some fond memories in the wider community for introducing Tamlyn Tomita in the 2nd movie (a very real kickass artist who deserves to be known as being far more than a former Hollywood ingenue).
But have you seen it lately? It’s pretty much unwatchable whenever Pat Morita is off-screen. The ending still gets me every time, though.
.
I think Bill’s point was that the movie was no great artistic achievement. It was just as much of a commercial Hollywood enterprise as the remake.
.
And how exactly do childhood memories of a movie get tarnished? Other than, I guess, suddenly remembering that Pat Morita molested you as a child.
For anyone decrying this or any other remake, think of it like live theater. I’d hope that someone that saw productions of, say, Merchant of Venice by two different companies wouldn’t denigrate the second because it wasn’t the first that they saw. Personally, I love older movies, but my wife and son see anything black and white and instantly want to turn it off. Could someone do Citizen Kane as well as the original? I don’t know, but I also would love to see someone try. (Had I the money, I’d love to BE the one to try, but…)
That said, there have been a few remakes in the last couple years that really didn’t need to be made.
Peter David: 1) Jaden Smith clearly actually KNOWS martial arts, and it shows, with the climactic championship square off way more convincing than the original.
Luigi Novi: Just so you know, that final kick by Dre was performed by Smith on a wire.
.
Peter David: Michelle Yeoh, the greatest martial arts actress in the world, has a marvelous cameo in which she engages in a staggering display of control while squaring off against a cobra.
Luigi Novi: Wow, I totally missed that it was her. I wasn’t even sure if it was a man or a woman, and referred to that character as a male when I wrote the Wikipedia plot summary. Where did you learn this, Peter? Did you stay and read the credits?
.
Bill K: Some people think remaking “The Karate Kid” is a sacrilege? It’s THE KARATE KID, for god’s sake. They’re not remaking “Citizen Kane”.
Luigi Novi: Yeah, really. For a remake of Citizen Kane, it should be eskrima that Charles Kane uses, not kung fu, so that when they show him at Xanadu, instead of a simple “No Trespassing” sign on the gate, they can show him beating up some kids on his lawn, just to keep it more current, to get that Bourne Identity crowd. They should also change the Spanish-American War to the Iraq War, for the same reason. And instead of being just a yellow journalist, he should be the creator of TMZ, or something.
.
And more explosions. Like maybe during Thompson’s attempt to find out more about Kane’s life, some of Kane’s loved ones try to kill him to keep him from finding out sordid stuff, like with a bomb. And the when Thompson survives the bomb, that’s when they hire ninjas, to finish him off more personally, which requires Thompson to use his own skills in capoeira, against their ninjitsu, spotlighting yet another martial art.
.
And bøøbš, the remake would need more bøøbš. Have Susan Alexander played by someone with nice bøøbš, like Jennifer Love Hewitt. Or maybe Jennifer Connelly. Yeah, Connelly would be a better choice for a remake of a movie like Citizen Kane than Jennifer Love Hewitt. Susan’s an alcoholic, and Connelly played a heroin addict, so Connelly would be better, because her bøøbš are bigger than Hewitt’s, even if they’re not like they were in The Rocketeer or Inventing the Abbots, and heroin addicts have big bøøbš. Ooh, the Rocketeer! Maybe we can add a jetpack to the plot somewhere! Like when they escape the ninjas!
.
And instead of Rosebud being a sled, maybe it can be something more trendy, like a snowboard, so they can shoehorn a snowboard competition somewhere in the film, like in those 80s skiing competition films!
.
That would be AWESOME.
Oh, I figured that final kick was on wires. First off, it looked remarkably dangerous. You don’t want to use a stuntman for that shot, so you want to wire up your star as a safety measure. You don’t trust him to do that kick for the 20, 30 takes that’s going to be required when screwing it up even once could wind up with him in a body cast.
.
I’m talking about the entire championship square off–the whole thing. I always had trouble believing that Daniel beats Johnny even with two good legs, much less with a limp. That’s due to the fact that Macchio didn’t really know karate. Jaden Smith, I absolutely believed could hold his own.
.
PAD
Okay, I see.
I’m not surprised no one knew it was Michelle Yeoh . . . she’s not credited ANYWHERE that I can find. I didn’t recognize her either. Are you SURE it was her, Mr. David?
Yep. We are really positive that it was her.
I have a huge Michelle Yeoh crush. I’ll be able to tell. I’ll let you know.
Fair enough, I’ll take your word then. Wonder why she’s not credited anywhere. That’s a rather grievous omission, I would think.
It’s not as uncommon as you might think. I’ve seen the word “uncredited” next to a role on IMDB quite a few times. It seems to be done mainly for cameos.
Oh, I know it’s not uncommon not to be credited in the movie. But I can’t find any reference to her being in the movie ANYWHERE online, from ANY resource!
Now THAT’S uncredited to the extreme.
Well, someone’s added KK2010 to her Wikipedia filmography, so there’s that.
Finally saw (and enjoyed) Karate Kid.
Absolutely without a doubt Michelle Yeoh.
Um, I live in Southern California and learned Shaolin Kenpo Karate here. Why doesn’t Karate make sense here, exactly?
As the conflict resolution method of choice? In most of the parts of SoCal I’ve been in, conflicts that escalated to a physical level would be solved with blades or guns…
Not for the characters in the movie. They weren’t criminals, they were jerks studying Karate from the grand high jerk of them all.
.
The other day I read a very good interview with the actor who played Bobby, Daniel’s rival in the original. He made a joke about how the movie was actually all about Bobby and his journey. Then he made some very good points about how the character actually did grow over the course of the movie. Mr. Miyagi has a line in the original about how there are no bad students, only bad teachers. If you really look at how Bobby figured out by the end that his teacher was a psycho, it becomes apparent how big a part of the movie that message really was.
Actually, his name was Johnny, IIRC. I know his last name was Lawrence, because when Miyagi’s appearance at his dojo distracted him, I can hear sensei John Kreese (Martin Kove) yelling at him, “What is the problem, Mister Lawrence?!” 🙂
Oh, right, Bobby was one of the other Cobra Kai’s
I didn’t say it didn’t make sense. I’m just saying that the martial arts in general and kung fu in particular seem far more a part of the culture of China than they do the culture of SoCal, and therefore made MORE sense to me.
.
PAD
Jason M. Bryant says:
June 16, 2010 at 1:18 am
.
The other day I read a very good interview with the actor who played Bobby, Daniel’s rival in the original. He made a joke about how the movie was actually all about Bobby and his journey. Then he made some very good points about how the character actually did grow over the course of the movie.
.
Neil Patrick Harris’ Barney Stinson (from HIMYM) would totally agree. In one episdoe he went on about how the title character (the one that actually *knew* karate) lost the championship fight..
I met Billy Zabka once. He was friends with someone who was in the cast of “Trancers IV” and showed up for the screening. And at the time, “Karate Kid” was in heavy rotation on HBO. I kept running into the climax of it and I told him I’d seen him get kicked in the face about nine times that month. And he said, “Yeah, I really wish they’d change the ending of that movie.”
.
PAD
I found the interview I mentioned.
.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/william-zabka,41893/
.
He seems like a good guy. He makes the same kind of self-effacing jokes in the interview that PAD mentioned. It’s also worth checking the videos in the article, especially the one where he’s sitting on the couch watching Karate Kid for the millionth time while his friends call him “Johnny.”
Yeah, Bobby was the one who thought Daniel “had enough” after the initial beating at the Halloween dance. To which another Cobra Kai (it was the one played by Steve McQueen’s son, Chad, I think), said:
.
“Shut up, Bobby!”
.
As for California culture, I don’t see why one has to infer that it has anything to do with California culture. So long as it’s a given that there are dojos in the area (which I assume there were/are), and that a group of friends may form through their shared membership at that dojo, as well as other things like school and social class (certainly not disputable), then I don’t see why it wouldn’t fit.
.
Yeah, martial arts certainly is native to China a a culture, which meant that its being more widespread lent itself more easily to those wideshots showing things like large groups of practioners in temples and in the mountains, but I never formed a comparison with the original that led me to conclude that it wasn’t as good a “fit” in the original. But whatever. 🙂
“But have you seen it lately? It’s pretty much unwatchable whenever Pat Morita is off-screen.”
.
If you’re talking about the second one, I can almost agree. if you’re talking about the first.well, we just REALLY disagree.
.
“The ending still gets me every time, though.”
The ending of the first film ALWAYS is satisfying to me. Incredibly well done/
.
“I think Bill’s point was that the movie was no great artistic achievement.”
In his opinion and, it seems, yours. I don’t agree.
.
“It was just as much of a commercial Hollywood enterprise as the remake.”
Well, yeah, but so what? “Rocky” was a mainstream movie. “Titanic”, “Lord of the Rings” and “Avatar” – among may others – were commercial successes and still won Oscars. “Commercial” and “having artistic merit” are not mutually exclusive when it comes to movies and, persona;y, I’m tired of the only films that some consider to have “artistic merit” are films about someone with a disability or that’s addicted to drugs that is seen by about 500 people and revels in it’s “non-commercialism”. there can be less predictable and/or more uplifting films that have artistic merit.
.
“And how exactly do childhood memories of a movie get tarnished? Other than, I guess, suddenly remembering that Pat Morita molested you as a child.”
.
Uh, yeah. What I’m referring to is those who want to relive their childhood memories and perhaps take their child/niece/nephew to an updated version that they will likely find cooler since it’s more contemporary and then have it be lame. I am all for remakes by the way. All for having a new generation’s take on a beloved, timeless story. Just get disappointed when they fall short.
What I’m referring to is those who want to relive their childhood memories
.
How tragic, if someone wants to do that, that there’s not some sort of technology which would permit you to buy or rent the movie on some sort of tape or disk and bring it home to watch.
.
and perhaps take their child/niece/nephew to an updated version that they will likely find cooler since it’s more contemporary and then have it be lame.
.
Which would be a consideration if the new version were lame. Except I don’t think so in the least.
.
PAD
“Well, yeah, but so what? “Rocky” was a mainstream movie. “Titanic”, “Lord of the Rings” and “Avatar” – among may others – were commercial successes and still won Oscars. “Commercial” and “having artistic merit” are not mutually exclusive when it comes to movies and, persona;y, I’m tired of the only films that some consider to have “artistic merit” are films about someone with a disability or that’s addicted to drugs that is seen by about 500 people and revels in it’s “non-commercialism”.”
.
Hmm, how do I find my way through the maze of straw men you’ve set up here? For starters, I didn’t say “commercial” (or “mainstream,” for that matter, which is not the same thing) and “having artistic merit” are mutually exclusive (and, regardless, I would never equate artistic merit with winning Oscars anyway). Of course it’s possible to be both. But in this case, it’s not. You disagree, and that’s fine, but to call it “sacrilege” that a formulaic remake is being churned out by the studio assembly line, one based on an already formulaic movie that was churned out by the studio assembly line 26 years ago (as opposed to a personal and visionary artistic achievement like, say, Citizen Kane) is perhaps overreacting. Which was the original point.
.
“there can be less predictable and/or more uplifting films that have artistic merit.”
.
Less predictable? How can anything be more predictable than The Karate Kid?
Jerome–congratulations on making the drudgereport…and you didn’t even have to sleep with Al Gore to do it!
Completely OT
Spider-man 2099 in new spiderman game!
Screen here:
http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2010/165/991324_20100615_790screen002.jpg
1) Jaden Smith clearly actually KNOWS martial arts, and it shows, with the climactic championship square off way more convincing than the original.
Peter, I have to play devil’s advocate here for the original film. Daniel was never supposed to be a martial arts master. He was a young teen who was being trained in his spare time to learn some karate to defend himself and to show his courage and determination. When he ultimately beat Johnny he was pretty banged up, showing the limitations of his training. That seemed believable to me, because from what I understand, it TAKES YEARS of practice to become proficient in any martial art. Daniel may have had 6 months tops, and it was enough for him to score some victory points in a controlled contest and to earn some respect from Johnny and the other guys in Cobra Kai. It underscored the message that it wasn’t Daniel’s karate so much that made him a victor, but his ability to rise to the challenge.
On the other hand, Dre is coming off very polished under similar circumstances and training time. You admittedly loved it. However for some people, like myself, that just ruins a lot of subtext and believability.
Oh, I believed that he would get banged up. But what it came down to was that the Cobra Kai students in general, and Johnny in particular, were clearly superior. I mean, they just were. You were rooting for Daniel–we were all rooting for Daniel–and so we were willing to suspend disbelief and celebrate his victory. Plus the entire notion of “Crane technique; if done right, no can defend.” And I was sitting there watching that film and thinking, “Uh…I don’t think so, no. Seems more like something a writer would manufacture for a film than anything based in karate.” Which, as it turned out, I was right. This version didn’t require anything that artificial. To me, that’s an improvement.
.
Don’t get me wrong. I loved the original, and I think it’s very well written. But from a martial arts point of view, this was superior.
.
PAD
Well, Miyagi-san was kinda right. I certainly can’t defend that Crane technique in this debate!
As for Dre’s technique, I bought the notion that he was a fast learner (being young helped) and it was Jackie Chan teaching him.
.
PAD
Hmmm.
.
Only the PAD quote was supposed to be blockquoted.
Plus the entire notion of “Crane technique; if done right, no can defend.” And I was sitting there watching that film and thinking, “Uh…I don’t think so, no.
Heh.. even watching the film as a 10 year old I found myself thinking thinking “No defence?! Johnny just face-butted Daniels foot!”
If I remember correctly Daniel tried the move again in Karate Kid Part 2 and his opponent almost broke his foot. So if you are all talking about the same move I am thinking there definetly was a defense for it.
Are you sure the original movie was about Bobby? How about the mom and her valiant journey as a single mother in the suburban jungles of Reseda?
.
It reminds me of the old joke about the actor who gets the tiny role of the grave-digger in a well-known Shakespeare play. He’s in a pub one night and a buddy, who’s never been to the theatre before, asks what the play is about. Well, the actor tells him, it’s all about this grave-digger…
As they say, there are no small roles, just small actors…
I don’t know, there was that one actor whose career bombed after he did that movie with the nude scene. His female fans were disappointed with his small part.
.
(Ok, ok, it needs work. I’m here all week.)
I’m not crazy about the idea of remakes of films myself (though I acknowledge Bill K.’s point about the Bogart Maltese Falcon being the best version, even though it’s the second remake of that film in a relatively short span), but if you must have a remake of Karate Kid, which would’ve been the better route to take? A whole new story (which this film apparently is) or a movie with a direct connection to the original? That is, Ralph Macchio’s character of Daniel in a key role? One in which Daniel, say, decides to (in the words of Yoda) pass on what he has learned to this kid with whom he feels some connection, either directly (by being sensei to Dre) or indirectly (by encouraging Dre to seek out a sensei)?
.
In short, should a remake of a film– especially one made a generation later– acknowledge the original? Or should it start fresh? Obviously, I’m not speaking of movies like The Maltese Falcon, since you couldn’t have any such “passing the torch” moments (“I’m Sam Spade, Jr. I’m a private eye. Years ago, my Dad was involved in a case involving a black bird. Now the bird’s back.” Kinda stretches credulity, doesn’t it?), but of films in which the original could logically be acknowledged.
.
For the record, I ask out of general curiosity, and not with any opinions about either film. I’ve only seen bits and pieces of the original on TV years ago and don’t expect I’ll have time to see the new version.
.
Again, I’d rather there were fewer remakes overall. In both film and TV; do we really need a new version of Hawaii Five-0, for example? Of course someone could argue that we didn’t need any new Star Trek series, that the ideas and characters of those later series might’ve developed in more interesting ways if they’d been created in non Star Trek universes. But even if we grant that argument, Star Trek was unique in its impact on popular culture. While Hawaii Five-O may have been a great series (if I ever saw it, it would’ve been years ago, and I don’t have any specific memories), I’m not aware of Hawaii Five-O conventions, etc. And I’ve never seen “book him, Danno” on a bumper sticker.
.
This discussion or remakes reminds me of a series of commercial on channel 64 in Cincinnati when I was in college. The channel was showing some classic 1950s and 60s TV series around the time some of these were being remade in either TV or film versions; and the commercial implies the better choice is to tune into that station and watch the originals. The commercial itself had a song playing on a record player. Someone then reaches down and pulls the needle across the record. He then replaces it with an earlier version of the same song, as the announcer says that remakes are never as good as the original. The hilarious part? One version of the commercial has the Isley Brothers’ version of “Twist and Shout” replaced by the Beatles’ version.
.
The Beatles version is the remake. We got a good laugh out of that.
.
Rick
And actually the Isley Brothers version is itself a remake, which makes the Beatles version a remake of a remake.
When the crane kick failed to work for Daniel in “Karate Kid 2,” I always imagined Daniel looking at Miyagi and saying “I thought you said there was no defense against this!” Then, Miyagi would reply “I said ‘If done properly, no can defense.’ Boy in first tournament too stupid to know you did it wrong.”
The problem was that Daniel did it right in the first film and wrong in the second. He waited until Johnny committed to the charge and then kicked. In KK2, Daniel got too excited and went too early…which is a not uncommon problem with teenage boys.
.
PAD
What I’m referring to is those who want to relive their childhood memories
.
“How tragic, if someone wants to do that, that there’s not some sort of technology which would permit you to buy or rent the movie on some sort of tape or disk and bring it home to watch.”
.
Really. No need to be sarcastic. Just saying it’s a reason why a lot of people hate remakes. Remember when it was reported that Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez were and Jennifer Lopez were going to starin a remake of “Casablanca”? I remember “Weeken Update” saying that “it’s for people who are fans of the original film, but wished it was terrible.” Also, it wasn’t that long ago some were considering a “Star Trek” reboot sacrilege. Most of them were soothed by the quality of J.J. Abrams’ vision. At the same time, I find it a bit of a downer to think that the first person a lot of people will think of as Inspector Clouseau is Steve Martin’s painfully unfunny version rather than peter Sellers.
In short, if you’re going to remake something, make dámņ sure you do it justice. Don’t destroy the brand.
.
“perhaps take their child/niece/nephew to an updated version that they will likely find cooler since it’s more contemporary and then have it be lame.
.
Which would be a consideration if the new version were lame. Except I don’t think so in the least.”
.
Which is why you have now convinced me to go see it:)
“How tragic, if someone wants to do that, that there’s not some sort of technology which would permit you to buy or rent the movie on some sort of tape or disk and bring it home to watch.”
.
Really. No need to be sarcastic.
.
There’s never a need for it. It’s just a perk.
.
Just saying it’s a reason why a lot of people hate remakes.
.
Well, then a lot of people are obtuse. Movie makers have been either producing remakes or revisiting original source material and making new versions of it for as long as there have been movies. The problem isn’t remakes. The problem is that people have no sense of history and they think that something they’ve just noticed is somehow brand spanking new.
.
PAD
I think the other problem is that some of the remakes bring nothing new to the table. Karate Kid 2010 brings Jackie Chan. Nuff said.
You mean to tell me “The Ten Commandments” wasn’t all original material? I am shocked! Shocked I say!
.
The major weakness of a remake is when it’s less about what other actors or directors can bring to the source material and more about what the source can bring to a celebrity. Still, if we’re going to have them, it would be better if more remakes were about the acting than the appearance.
.
If my imagination can accept Superman on the big screen or Jack Lemmon passing as a woman, it could handle Sandra Oh playing the lead in a remake of “Patton”.
Sad, but true. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS was indeed a remake. Possibly even of a remake. Oh, but wait! Remade by the same director because they now had the resources to do it as they’d wanted to all along. This is different than some hack wanting to ride on the coat tails of a successful original. Look at THE ITALIAN JOB. The remake was so bad they had to include the Michael Caine original with the new one in the hopes of actually selling any copies. Or ROLLERBALL where the remake completely ignored the “corporations rule the world” aspect, thus negating the reason behind the great scenes between Houseman and Caan’s characters in the original. Or THE IN-LAWS where they spoil right at the start the whole “is he or isn’t he” bit that worked so very well in the original. Or HEAVEN CAN WAIT whose ending was depressing compared to the original. The list goes on. I did like Spielberg’s WAR OF THE WORLDS and maybe KARATE is indeed very good (haven’t seen the new one) but given the ever-increasing number of remakes (they certainly weren’t nearly as prevalent 30 years ago) that utterly Fail To Get The Point that made the original the success it was, why not do something truly original. Then, if it flops, one has the excuse there was no model to copy from.
Let’s also keep in mind that what is considered the very first narrative film in the history of cinema–“The Great Train Robbery”–was made in 1903. This was so early in film development that audiences actually ducked when bullets flew on the screen because they thought they might get hit. It was then remade. When? I kid you not: 1904. That’s right, the very first genuine movie was remade one year after its release. And it’s been remade about a half dozen times since.
.
Remakes aren’t new. Neither are sequels (the first sequel, “Fall of a Nation,” was made exactly one year after “Birth of a Nation”). What’s relatively new is the number of venues in which fans can instantly bìŧçh about remakes and sequels.
.
PAD
Let’s also keep in mind that what is considered the very first narrative film in the history of cinema–”The Great Train Robbery”–was made in 1903. … It was then remade. When? I kid you not: 1904.
.
And in 1905, a parody film entitled “The Little Train Robbery” was released. Whether any member of the Wayans family was involved remains in dispute.
“Let’s also keep in mind that what is considered the very first narrative film in the history of cinema–”The Great Train Robbery”–was made in 1903.”
.
Actually, they’d been making narrative films since the late 1890s, but your point still stands.
“Remakes aren’t new. Neither are sequels (the first sequel, “Fall of a Nation,” was made exactly one year after “Birth of a Nation”). What’s relatively new is the number of venues in which fans can instantly bìŧçh about remakes and sequels.”
.
I think it’s also a change in expectations. Back when movies got started, the only thing close to it was theater. Everybody expects one group to put on a play, then another group to put on the exact same play. So the idea of seeing two different interpretations of the same work was no big deal. Now we have DVDs, rentals, internet downloads (including legal ones), and TV reruns, so we have lots of ways of seeing the same movie over and over again. Back then, a new version was the natural, if only, way to rewatch a story you liked.
.
This happened with music, too. The guy who wrote “Blue Suede Shoes” had a big hit with it, but was very grateful that Elvis Priestly waited until it was off the charts to do his version. Elvis’ version came out *immediately* after the original finished its run. That was normal back then, one artist would do a song and then others would release their version.
“Remade by the same director because they now had the resources to do it as they’d wanted to all along. This is different than some hack wanting to ride on the coat tails of a successful original.”
.
Yeah, that wasn’t uncommon back in the day. Hitchcock made The Man Who Knew Too Much twice, for example.
.
“Look at THE ITALIAN JOB. The remake was so bad they had to include the Michael Caine original with the new one in the hopes of actually selling any copies.”
.
That’s not really a good example, considering the original is not very well known and most people who saw the remake probably didn’t even realize it was a remake. And anyway, it was a fair-sized hit at the box office (with a sequel on the way) and it received good reviews. Personally, I quite enjoyed it.
.
“The Great Train Robbery”–was made in 1903. This was so early in film development that audiences actually ducked when bullets flew on the screen because they thought they might get hit. It was then remade. When? I kid you not: 1904. “
.
Reminds me of a discussion I got into on IMDB some years ago. Some guy was decrying the state of modern Hollywood and the lack of imagination that it shows with the many remakes, sequels and adaptations that it’s been cranking out lately. He had a large chorus of followers saying the same thing.
.
I pointed out that Hollywood has never been anything but a bit of a remake, sequel and adaptation factory and had everybody telling me that I didn’t know what I was talking about. They’d point out various decades or eras when Hollywood was “still more creative than today” and I’d point out the sizable number of remakes, sequels and adaptations that were birthed in the time period they were pointing out.
.
Hëll, even back during the 30s, 40s and 50s you had Hollywood cranking out remakes and sequels like there was no tomorrow and half of them, especially mysteries and detective films, were based on works from another medium.
.
I think the funniest thing from that thread was when the most adamant voice for the “Hollywood has No Creativity These Days” crowd stated that the rel golden age for Hollywood’s creativity was the 80s. Somehow, even after repeating that deceleration, he couldn’t figure out how I knew he was a teenager in the 80s. I told him how I had guessed it and it sorta went downhill from there.
.
But why I guessed that was a bit along the lines of what you said.
.
“The problem is that people have no sense of history and they think that something they’ve just noticed is somehow brand spanking new.”
.
It’s usually the early teen years when people start paying attention to everything that’s around them in a serious way, but that doesn’t mean that they’re aware of what came before. Everything is new, even if it is just reheated leftovers, and it’s all great. Ten plus years on you start to see the stuff that’s now new and see new leftovers for what they are. It also creates that vibe of everything back “then” being better than everything “now” because it was all original and new back then.
.
And, of course, anyone who thinks these new leftovers are a great meal just because they, like you ten plus years earlier, haven’t ever had them before or paid any attention when they did is an idiot and part of the problem destroying movies today.
.
I also think technology has played a role in making some people more jaded and vocal about how bad Hollywood has gotten about remakes and sequels. We can have almost anything ever made for TV or film at our fingertips with almost no real effort. People who’ve grown up in the boom era of VHS and later Laser Discs and DVDs seem to forget that getting entertainment like that wasn’t always as easy as a trip to the local mall or Best Buy.
“Less predictable? How can anything be more predictable than The Karate Kid?”
.
How about any Disney underdog sports movie? Or any “Friday the 13th” film?
Bill Mulligan,
“Jerome–congratulations on making the drudgereport…and you didn’t even have to sleep with Al Gore to do it!”
.
Thanks, Bill!
“Oh, right, Bobby was one of the other Cobra Kai’s”
.
Bobby was the one, I believe, who looked the most impressive out of everyone at the tournament, utterly unstoppable – even more impressive than Johnny and knew he could beat Daniel, and probably would have. But his sensei didn’t “want him beat…out of commission” and so he delivered the shot to the knee that would get him disqualified and looked like it would end Daniel’s tournament – until his triumphant return.
I remember reading somewhere that only one of the actors who played the Cobra Kais knew karate beforehand. I wonder if it was him?
“Just saying it’s a reason why a lot of people hate remakes.
.
Well, then a lot of people are obtuse.”
.
That goes without saying. But again, I think it’s quality that is the key. A lot of the people who roared that only Shatner and Nimoy should be allowed to portray Kirk and Spock were won over by the quality of the film. If that wasn’t there, people would have been bìŧçhìņg that they ‘got a TV guy to do the film, what do you expect”, been saying there should have been another “Next Generation” movie or gone with a “Deep Space Nine” film.
.
“Movie makers have been either producing remakes or revisiting original source material and making new versions of it for as long as there have been movies. The problem isn’t remakes. The problem is that people have no sense of history and they think that something they’ve just noticed is somehow brand spanking new.”
.
True. But should the average teen who just wants to see a movie with his buddies or with his girlfriend really be expected to have as vast a knowledge of the history of cinema as the people on this board, when he he or she just wants to be entertained? And it’s that very lack of knowledge that has lovers of the originals afraid – that when they think of the film they will think of the šhìŧŧÿ updated remake – if, indeed, it does fall short.
.
As for people “with no sense of history” it reminds me of an interview with Chris Claremont back in 2000 when he took the X-Men titles back after a 9-year hiatus – and how some fans were excited about the ‘cool stories being turned out by this new writer, Chris Claremont”. Chris simply took it as evidence that you always have a chance to be new to somebody and was glad that the majority of fans with those sentiments were excited by his newer work.
The One and Only Reason NOT to See The Karate Kid
Jaden Smith cannot act.
Well, I saw it and I would strongly disagree.
.
PAD
I just saw Jonah Hex last night, and I can post at least five reasons NOT to see it. Since it is based on a comic, PAD, will you be reviewing it here?
Only if I see it, which I’m still on the fence about.
.
PAD
From the actual trailers (so no spoilers here), three words: horse-mounted Gatlings. If that’s not enough to scare someone off, they’ll probably watch anything. If they’d done it straight as in the comics where he’s just a really tough Eastwood-type character who can take punishment and keep going, I’d probably go – and I’m not even really a Western fan. But this travesty?
My biggest issue keeping me from seeing it is Megan Fox. Every time Josh Brolin speaks in the trailer, I get excited. Every time Fox speaks, the excitement drains out of me. I hope she’s better in the movie than she is in the trailer, because her acting looks absolutely terrible in those few minutes.
.
Fox is attractive, but I think it’s time for Hollywood to accept that every time they want to put her in a movie, they should call Zoe Saldana instead.
I don’t get that movie at all. Jonah Hex is just a gunslinging Western character with a horribly scarred face, who happens to have been created in comic books. There’s nothing about him that screams “movie adaptation.” But since they did make a movie about him, they somehow reasoned that he’s a comic book character, so they had to put him in a comic book-style movie (or at least what they consider to be a comic-book style movie). That’s very strange logic. Who is this movie for? It’s not for Jonah Hex fans, and it’s certainly not for Western fans. It’s for teenage boys who couldn’t care less about the comic book or about the Western genre.
.
Then again, I’m totally prejudging it, so I could be way off-base. But the reviews aren’t looking too good, so I don’t think I am.
Gary,
“The One and Only Reason NOT to See The Karate Kid
Jaden Smith cannot act.”
.
And this is based on what body of work, exactly? He definitely was decent in “The Pursuit of Happyness” and likely can emote even better now that he’s older so why not give him and the film a chance rather than being so negative as to dismiss it out of hand?
.
The Starwolf,
“From the actual trailers (so no spoilers here), three words: horse-mounted Gatlings. If that’s not enough to scare someone off, they’ll probably watch anything. If they’d done it straight as in the comics where he’s just a really tough Eastwood-type character who can take punishment and keep going, I’d probably go – and I’m not even really a Western fan. But this travesty?”
.
Those three words you cite took me aback as well. however, Jimmy Palmiotti has said he is pleased with how it turned out and says it’s in the same spirit as his stories – which I love – so I’m going to go and judge for myself tonight.
Peter, what are your thoughts on Spider-Man 2099 and his universe being one of the main storylines in the coming Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions game?
Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BmP93b1pQ
Looks like they are also introducing new villains for him, like Hobgoblin 2099.
IGN video where they discuss the different worlds at length, also the 2099 universe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoEbXJSFfQE
Am I right in thinking that while SM 2099 has been a playable character in previous games, this is the first game to introduce him in his own 2099 world?
For me, a big reason why I have no interest in the new Karate Kid is the age of the new “Kid”.
It was very disturbing to me from the previews to see little kids fighting little kids. I don’t know if I would enjoy the film based on the age group.
The original KK worked because of the teen angst and even though I was a kid when I saw it, something about it felt…real. And I had the movie adaption book which helped flesh out some of the scenes even more. Maybe I was just sheltered but I didn’t have much pre-teen angst so I don’t know if I would relate so much.
Maybe if I had a kid or two to watch enjoy it but I do not.
The main reason, though, is the kids fighting kids seemed a little too jarring to me.
the only reason people say that this is a bad remake is because the lead actor in it is black, and given that he is in a chinese setting. hes successful (and not to mention will smiths son),so get over it. on the other hand, twilight can go straight to hëll! those movies arent remakes yer people watch the hëll out of it like its a good movie or something. the so called actors and actresses in it are only looking for attention. jaden smith actually endured real training to star in this movie, so haters can go to hëll!
“the only reason people say that this is a bad remake is because the lead actor in it is black, and given that he is in a chinese setting.”
Really, guy? And I suppose people think Morgan Freeman movies are bad because he’s black, or Denzel Washington, or Will Smith for that matter. Because that kind of thing is incredibly to important.
And the whole thing with setting it in China? I think it has more to do with kairos than anything else. And frankly, the locales are beautiful and stress Dre’s alien status even more.
IMDB finally got around to listing what this space reported weeks ago: An uncredited Michelle Yeoh played the cobra handler.
.
PAD
“the only reason people say that this is a bad remake is because the lead actor in it is black,”
.
How insulting.
.
“on the other hand, twilight can go straight to hëll!”
Dude, you have serious, serious…
.
“those movies arent remakes yer people watch the hëll out of it like its a good movie or something.”
..serious, serious..
.
“the so called actors and actresses in it are only looking for attention. jaden smith actually endured real training to star in this movie, so haters can go to hëll!”
.
..SERIOUS ISSUES!
Hi,
I just watch Karate Kid and was at the Wikipedia section looking at the actors/actresses in the movie. I was surprised to see Michelle Yeoh listed in the movie (uncredited to boot!) as the lady training with the cobra.
I wonder why no one bothers to clear up the misunderstanding because the lady is clearly not Michelle Yeoh. Watch it again, it’s not her.
Are really sure it is Michelle Yeoh as the snake charmer ?
She’s not in imdb casting and some blieve it is her and some doesn’t !
Nothing in her official website either…
leepifer,
It IS her:)