[Movie]Enter The Dragon to be remade

[Majsju]

Warner to Remake Enter the Dragon as Awaken the Dragon

Thursday, August 9th, 2007 at 11:54 pm by Nix

The gratuitous remake machine rolls on, unabated. This time the victim is Bruce Lee’s 1973 classic “Enter the Dragon”. The remake will “update” the story, and instead of a martial artist going to a crimelord’s island to compete in his martial arts tournament for revenge, while at the same time collecting evidence of the crimelord’s evil deads for the feds, the hero will instead be an FBI agent who pursues a Shaolin monk to the world of underground tournament fighting. Yeah, sounds more like a direct-to-video B-action movie from the ’90s than a major motion picture by a big studio to me, too.

 

The man who will be writing and making his directorial debut on the film is “The Shield” executive producer Kurt Sutter, who describes the film as a noir-style remake of “Enter the Dragon”.

 

Um, okay. “Enter the Dragon” as noir? I don’t get it.

 

More from Sutter:

 

“I’m a huge noir fan, and this plot lends itself to the film I want to make,” Sutter said. “I wanted to set it in these underground fight clubs where the action is really raw and expose the brutality of Shaolin kung fu. This will be more ‘Raging Bull’ than ‘Crouching Tiger’ in its viciousness.”

 

Sutter will look to discover a fight star in the role of the monk and cast an established American actor to play the FBI agent.

 

So why exactly are they going out of their way to bastardize the Bruce Lee movie to do it? Why don’t they just call their film “Awaken the Dragon” (or whatever the hell they want to call it) and not mention any relationship to the Bruce Lee movie “Enter the Dragon”? I just don’t “get” the need to taint the 1973 movie with this one.

 

But hey, maybe it’s just me.

 

 

http://www.beyondhollywood.com/warner-to-remake-enter-the-dragon-as-awaken-the-dragon/

 

eriously, are Sutter on crack, or what? What did Bruce Lee ever do to him to deserve get his memory tainted like this?

[chelseafan]

Oh ...they must be on crack ???..

[reyler]

So why exactly are they going out of their way to bastardize the Bruce Lee movie to do it? Why don’t they just call their film “Awaken the Dragon” (or whatever the hell they want to call it) and not mention any relationship to the Bruce Lee movie “Enter the Dragon”? I just don’t “get” the need to taint the 1973 movie with this one.

 

Does it stand a chance in hell of making back its budget without the name recognition?

[ironcross]

dam hollywood and all its remakes

[Mendorah]

Ok, now this one is just WRONG!

 

I wonder if we could start an online petition to kill this one?  Kinda like the "save our show" petitions, but opposite.

[reyler]

Personally I'd rather abort the Alvin and the Chipmunks movie whose trailer showed a live action Alvin eating a chipmunk turd.

[ironcross]

call me a guy but i gots to see that

[reyler]

See, that's sort of the point I was getting at, which is starting to no longer belong in this thread. If you have to do that to Alvin and the Chipmunks to market it to today's audience, why bother making the movie at all? If the primary humor of the film is American Pie fratboy vulgarity, which it appears to be if that's the scene the trailer hangs on, when the original was rather excessively saccharine... maybe I'm just too much a child of the eighties, when cartoons didn't have to be 95% poop jokes to be entertaining.

 

*derails the thread*

[ironcross]

in all honesty i do have to agree with you.  the overall vulgarity of the modern media is disgusting. what happend to the good ol days with laual and hardy, charlie chaplin, and thier kind.  good clean comedy.  but i bet there where people back then who complained that people getting hit on the head or falling down stairs ect was crude as well.

[The Outsider]

but i bet there where people back then who complained that people getting hit on the head or falling down stairs ect was crude as well.

 

From what I've heard The Three Stooges were pretty controversial in their day, with a lot of people saying that kids shouldn't be allowed to watch it in case they hurt each other.

 

And when you think about it there has always been a lot violence in the Looney Toons, not to mention cross-dressing, which must have been pretty risque in its day.

[reyler]

That's not really what I was getting at. I have nothing against toilet humor (okay, well, it's not my favorite exactly, but that's beside the point), but the fact that, if you have to completely renovate something in order to sell it to a new market, a new generation, you're not really selling the same product, and you're cheating people by claiming that you really are. This movie will be called Enter the Dragon, for instance, primarily to bring in people who would otherwise never have seen it, simply from the draw of anything associated with Bruce Lee. But it's not really going to be the same product. It's not going to be the same story, probably not the same treatment of characters or aesthetics or anything, so any attempt to link it with the original movie of the same title is basically just throwing it a life preserver. Would this Alvin and the Chipmunks movie have any chance without the nostalgia factor? Probably not, in fact it shows all signs of being Garfield all over again. But because it carries the name of something that people loved when they were younger, it's got a fighting chance, even if it only bears a partial resemblance to its source. Alvin and the Chipmunks was never about poop jokes. And I'd go further with this, but I have to get ready for work.  :P