Unless if you have been living under a rock, I'm sure that some of you have heard that they are doing the remake televised version of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. For those of you who haven't seen it before, prepare for your minds to be blown. Also, be prepared to actually go out and see the original and have your mind (and possibly some other part of your anatomy) blown. As to the rest of you who have seen the original....and have heard about the remake,......I have to wonder..... .....Anybody else feel either insulted or even part of their childhood has been officially crushed.....??? We already had the deaths of people like David Bowie and Gene Wilder. Those shocked us. The remake of The Rocky Horror Picture Show......??? Okay. What was Hollywood thinking when they had this idea and why screw with a classic??? Aside from the only original cast member making an appearance as The Criminologist, Tim Curry is either doing this to keep a sense of tradition alive.....or sold his soul and doing this for a paycheck. I'm going with the latter. But let's take a look at some of the flaws already. The role of Frankenfurter, a role that was made popular by Tim Curry,....and any other guy willing to dress in fishnet stockings, heels and a corset,....is being played by a black woman. Now don't get me wrong,....I'm not racist or against women's rights,....but isn't that taking the song "Sweet Transvestite" and ruining the whole concept somewhere??? What's a transvestite??? A man who dresses as a woman. A woman who is dressing as a woman cannot be a transvestite. I actually looked that one up. It also bothers me that there's a bunch of these younger kids who, and I'm gonna say it,....have never seen nor experienced the Rocky Horror Picture Show in select movie theaters. Aside from stage productions, you NEED to have the full experience of crowd participation. It's not the same where you hear the line "In the back row" when they play "Science Fiction / Double Feature" only to get up, turn around, point and yell "THAT'S YOU!!!" to nobody else in the room.....or a bunch of folks who just don't get it. Sorry for the long wall of text....but the reboot of Rocky Horror is just wrong.....WRONG I TELL YOU!!!!!
I tried to give the trailer they released earlier in the year a chance. Personally I thought them casting Victoria Justice as Janet was a decent move. I started getting a little uneasy seeing the casting for other roles (seemed like some of the actors were just playing the role, not being the role), but surprisingly not Frank, at least not at first. That crashed and burned once I heard the new version of Frank deliver the "It's not easy having a good time" line. They were facing an uphill battle to begin with, though. The original version casts a long shadow, so they HAD to know they'd be dealing with that. I'd imagine the same kind of thing takes place when a theater group puts on a production of Rocky Horror. But I think something that wasn't taken into consideration is the time the original was made. If you sit down and watch films that came out in the early and mid '70s, there was just a weird, almost surreal vibe to some of them that you just don't see after a certain point. That vibe is especially present in genre films like The Exorcist or Logan's Run, and it's just as evident in Rocky Horror. I think it's a significant part of what makes the film what it is. Without that kind of vibe (or at least an attempt to recapture it), I think there's a really good chance that, no matter how good the performances are, a remake of Rocky Horror will just ring a little hollow.
I won't even acknowledge the new one's existence. There's a reason why the original is so popular. Because it was cheaply made and extremely campy. You can't create camp. Only the fans can create camp. The original was once thought horrible until someone came up with the audience participation aspect of it. After that, it took off. It was interactive before people knew what interactive was. Going to see it(usually at midnight) was an event. It was a party and in the beginning it was spontaneous. You can't create that. You can't manufacture that. It's like A Christmas Story. Pretty much a box office flop, once it got to TV, it took off and now it's just as much of a Christmas classic as Charlie Brown, The Grinch, Frosty, and It's A Wonderful Life. Then they tried to make a sequel. It sucked. Again, it tried to recreate the magic. Magic isn't something that is created. It just happens. As Willflynne said, movies from back then just had this vibe that just was. Take Flesh Gordon. Classic, hilarious, soft core **** movie. It was just so incredibly silly, it was genius. Other movies of the times; Kentucky Fried Movie, Amazon Women on the Moon, even Airplane. Classics. That level of camp couldn't be reproduced in today's Hollywood for all the tea in China.
in the small town where i grew up rocky horror used to play every friday and saturday night at our only local movie theater. thats not that uncommon but it was also the only thing to do on a friday and saturday night and as my best friend worked at the local movie theater i got to see it every weekend twice for free for a few years. i can recite every line and lyric side by side through the entire movie without even trying hard. i have to agree. the remake just looks like its phoned in. its missing something. i love laverne cox. casting her as frank looks good on paper. shes fantastic on orange is the new black but she seems to be missing that insane over the top edge that curry gave to the role. she plays the role too soft. i can remember talks of rocky horror remake going as far back as he late 80's. at one point madonna wanted in to play magneta. on the bright side this is a made for tv movie. it doesn't count.
Iv never been against remakes, but I am not crazy about them either. Also not really sure what people mean when they make claims how a remake ruins the original. Never heard anyone say that the bad Planet Of The Apes remakes made it so that they have never been able to watch the originals again. If anything it sent me back running and screaming to watch them. In way I am in favor of them because it gives the story to a new generation of movie fans. Some 13 year old will see this movie and feel the same way as people did when watching the movie in 1975. -- And then in the year 2035 when they make ANOTHER remake, that same kid who saw the 2016 one will rant about remaking the remake is killing him or her on the inside. A lot of it has to do with entitlement. We see something in the entertainment world that means a lot to us, and we start to feel like we own it in some ways. A remake can feel like it being taken away, when we still have as much ownership as we ever did. (which is none) It's like people who like bands that are not very well known. Then they get a 30 second sample of one of their songs in a movie or a commercial for macaroni and cheese, and become more popular. Which makes them "sale outs" for no longer being a best kept secret. The songs just don't sounds good anymore now that they have a tshirt for sale at HotTopic. All and all, it's a good thing. Gives a new generation something they can call their own. As well as inspire them to go back and watch the original if they never saw it. As for me, I'm sure I will see the movie at some point. But not really interested in seeing it while it's in the theaters. Maybe after the dvd comes out. lol I love the thought of someone getting on the computer after you, looking for something in the history tab and seeing a google search about defining transvestites...or defining "sweet transvestites" XD Cox talked about this in am interview not all that long ago. http://www.out.com/out-exclusives/2...cox-not-so-politically-correct-frank-n-furter Some people worry that the gender politics of the film, especially the use of the word “transvestite,” are outdated. A lot of people have been critical of a transgender woman playing a character who refers to herself as a “transvestite.” But it’s really important to note that in 1975, our understanding of the term transvestite was not the same as today. [Activist] Sylvia Rivera is one of my favorite examples of someone who referred to herself as a “transvestite” in the ’70s. She famously started S.T.A.R. — Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries — with Marsha P. Johnson. These pioneers used the term to further themselves, but we also need to note that, yes, transvestite is an antiquated term. I think it’s possible to have a conversation about how language evolves. We can do that, and we can also enjoy Rocky Horror in 2016. ^ tho that kinda sounds like a Politically Correct statement for something not being politically correct. =X Buuuut If we are trying to be politically correct, in the original movie (Cox should have pointed this out) Frank-N-Furter is gay. And transvestites are typically straight men. Like Eddie Izzard So to be "politically correct" for the original movie,if the Dr. was a women born in a mans body, the lyrics should have been "I'm just a sweet transgender" OR if he just a gay man who dresses in women's clothing, the lyrics should have been "I'm just a sweet dragqueen" ......neither really have the same dancing beat to "I'm just a sweet transvestite" tho. Like Cox said in her interview about words evolving over time, "transvestite" has not necessarily been redefined, but it does tend to have more meaning attached to it now than it did back then. Which is why today most use the term "cross-dresser" now. more info on transvestite/cross-dresser if interested http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/healthy-living/sexual-health/a2264/transvestites-and-cross-dressing/
Ok, you are taking it a bit to the extremes here. This is just another of the doing a musical on T.V., that has been done for the past few years. NBC has done a few live broadcast and FOX jumped in last year with Grease, this is what FOX is doing this year. Basically they are treating RHPS as a musical and musicals keep running and get revivals. What this will hopefully do is bring a whole new audience to RHPS, plus stir fond memories but is in no way a replacement of the original. Now I will say that I don't really like Laverne Cox playing Frank N. Furter. Though she does somewhat fit into the gender ambiguity of the character, being that she was born a he. The thing is she is to female for the character, visually you lose all that was taboo about Furter. To MidKnight Masquerade. Frank N. Furter isn't gay, to my recall he is bi. Though yes his ultimate creation (Rocky) is a man he had relations and interests with both men and women.
ahh snap, that's right. I forgot he hooked up with Susan Sarandon character. Also forgot he got with Barry Bostwick character. lol I could only remember his Creation
Actually,....technically,....Frank-N-Furter isn't gay.....nor is he bi. Frank-N-Furter is pan-sexual, meaning that anyone (and probably anything) is open and fair game. Although the concept of going with a stage show revival has been done (or thought of being done) many loyal fans of the original production would still keep it to where Frank-N-Furter would be played as a male. A female, again, takes away the concept of the song "Sweet Transvestite". It's no longer a transvestite,.....it's now a woman who's dressed incredibly tacky (or in some people's opinions). I'm not saying that Laverne Cox is a bad actor,.....I'm just saying that the producers going with that direction is trying to play it "safe" with some crowds. Besides, how would kids react to a grown man wearing near drag??? If they hadn't heard of Eddie Izzard (and I admit,....he's funny as hell) or heard of that show "Bosom Buddies", a lot of the younger and newer viewers would be going "I thought Frank-N-Furter was a woman??" "No, Billy. Frank-N-Furter was a man in fishnet stockings and heels." "but....but....but....." "SHUT UP KID!!!!! WATCH THE ORIGINAL FILM!!!!!" The original production (both stage and film) are a classic. It's great midnight movie stuff. Post stage productions that have been done since the movie have kept to the original version crafted by Richard O'Brian. Having to veer off that established path would be like re-doing Breaking Bad but instead of meth they're selling weed. Same drug concept.....but the exception is one of them is okay with a lot of people. (I'm referring to smoking weed) The other actors,.....okay. Maybe some problems here and there,....mostly with the realm of me going with having to pick another actor for the particular part. But Cox playing Frank-N-Furter,.....yeah.....she might have the voice and accent......but it's taking away from what made that role so great to play in the first place. Remember.....there's a light..... OVER IN THE FRANKENSTEIN PLACE.
From the film.......they left out 2 scenes..... Superheroes is on the original film soundtrack......I don't think "Once in Awhile" ever made it.
I don't know about "Once in a While" but "Superheroes" does appear in the film. It just depends on which release you see. I got the 25th anniversary DVD release of Rocky Horror, and they included both the US and UK releases of the film and one of those two releases includes "Superheroes" in the film. I just can't remember whether it's the US or UK release right now. LOL I'll have to check. ..... Ok, just checked, it's the UK version. I don't really know why the cut it from the US version, though. Without that song the cut between Frank's house launching and going into the last bit from the narrator/Criminologist is kind of abrupt, almost jarring.
Probably cut for time. I remember watching the original in theaters and it wasn't there. "Once in a While" has still yet to be included in special editions.
When you say the "original" do you mean the stage show or the picture show? Given some of the rather horrid things that went on to create the movie you shouldn't be in the slightest bit surprised about any of this.
I am trying to keep an open mind about it, but having watched Sound of Music, Peter Pan and The Wiz, I don't have high hopes that this will be a successful production. Granted, this is not a "live" production but any show that undergoes a revival seems to lose a part of what made the original special. For Rocky, it was very much a product of its time. Consider that Glam Rock was short-lived and also on its way out but the sexual revolution was in full swing with gays being shown as characters on network TV shows and women taking control of their sex lives. It's so disheartening when you seen RHPS played on cable TV and they edit out the scene of Frank pulling Brad's legs up in the air and they have altered the shot in Rose Tint My World of Rocky's crotch.
I can kinda understand on editing the scene with Frank and Brad.....but I never knew that there was an altered shot of Rocky's crotch..... ....why did that last part sound somewhat obscene.....??? But I agree, it was a product of it's time and has had a loyal fan base that has gone on for years,.....even back to when it first came out as part of the midnight movie deal. As far as the sexual revolution and the gay lifestyle, it's something which I do overlook and go for RHPS being there for entertainment purposes only with a touch of nostalgia.....completed with a step to the right.....
I'm still not cra-cra about seeing this reboot. But the music sounds like it's going to be pretty good. Even if I do not see the movie in the near future, I still might get the soundtrack early on. I think she sounds like a punk-rock version of Eartha Kitt ================================================= "Laverne Cox Singing 'Sweet Transvestite' Will Make You Shiver With Anticipation" "The FOX premiere of The Rocky Horror Picture Show: Let's Do The Time Warp Again is right around the corner — October 20, to be exact! To get us pumped for the premiere, the production has released Laverne Cox's rendition of one of the show's most iconic songs, the Dr. Frank-N-Furter showstopper, "Sweet Transvestite." Originally played by the inimitable Tim Curry, Cox certainly has some big heels to fill. Give the new song a listen and let us know how you think she did!" http://www.pride.com/lavernecox/201...ransvestite-will-make-you-shiver-anticipation =================================================
Been seeing the ads during weekend football on the associated networks of Fox. I have to say from the start that it's kind of odd seeing Rocky Horror advertised during football, but that's kind of beside my point. LOL Unfortunately the more ads I see, the less confident I am in the finished product. I just keep getting the vibe that, despite whatever good intentions they had in making it, they missed the mark. Even with keeping in mind that the shadow of the original looms LARGE and might be affecting how I view it, I usually end up walking away from the ads just shaking my head. I think they're making the same mistake that some more recent parody movies have made, that they're camping it up too much. There's no denying the original is campy, but to really pull it off well you've got to walk a pretty narrow tightrope between camping it up and playing it straight. And yes, I know the statement "playing it straight" is rather odd to use in relation to Rocky Horror. LOL If you camp it up too much, it can be tougher to connect with (or even be interested in) the characters and what happens to them. I think they walked that tightrope pretty well in the original Rocky Horror, but I'm not seeing it in the ads for the new one. I wish I could say I'm still going to give it a fair chance and watch, but the interest just isn't there anymore.
After hearing the version of the song...... . I wouldn't go with Eartha Kitt. To me, a little bit of a Grace Jones sort of vibe. But, also catching the promos for the reboot,....they are actually doing.....(catch this).... audience participation To be more exact,.....shots of the audience making the comments during the film and using the props in the right places. Again......see the NO signs from earlier. Rocky Horror Picture Show is to have the audience participation,......while you're in the theater......NOT having it put before you and expect you to follow along. It takes the magic out of the whole thing.
