Question:
Anyone like to hazard an opinion? The Stars Wars Special Editions did great business back in '97, so what went wrong here?
E.T. is one of the greatest films ever made arguably, and judging from its original 1982 box office a massive crowd-pleaser too ($700m worldwide). So how come little interest for its 20th anniversary revamp?
The only reason I can think is that Lucas had always controlled Star Wars so carefully that it had been rarely seen on tv, and along with limited releases on the home market this meant that there was some kudos attached to going to see them again at the flicks. None of this was the case with E.T., which in the UK anyway has been on telly a lot over the years, and it was always easy to pick up on vid also.
However, it's a real shame irrespective of the controversy of Spielberg's changes -- it's a landmark film and I for one wish it had done better.
For all its great original box-office ET has never had the staying power of the Starwars films.
I think the mentality of audiences over the past 20 years means action films are likely to be more coveted than drama.
I personally was put off by the replacement of guns by walkie-talkies (was this actually true?) in some scenes.
It is a great film but no series of films will ever match the drawing power of Starwars - not even Indiana Jones, Superman, Bond or the Matrix will draw comparable repeat audiences to the cinema.:)
Because it's crap?
More like because everyone knew it would come out of DVD. If it's that much loved a film then you're going to buy it right?
Rick McCallum talks about the phenomenum here: http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/17/film.dvd.reut/index.html , suggesting that the industry now relies on revenue from post-release, presumably primarily DVD and video to actually make back the budget. Repeat viewings are way down, and ET's re-release was basically either one big repeat viewing (if you're my age), or of no interest because it's not hyped to hell (if you're in the 'target' age bracket).
The example of the Star Wars re-releases pretty much backs this up. They were pre-DVD (to all intents and purposes) and eminently re-watchable. If they'd come out now I suspect they would have had a much smaller audience as people would assume they were a big ad for the forthcoming DVDs, rightly or wrongly, which is pretty much what ET was (IMHO).
Originally posted by beobrand
Because it's crap?
Not sure I would have phrased it quite as directly, but I do agree. Have never been able to see what the fuss is about this kiddie flick then or now.
Originally posted by stefmcd
I personally was put off by the replacement of guns by walkie-talkies (was this actually true?) in some scenes.
I didn't notice walkie-talkies when I watched it a couple of evenings ago but the camera did seem to be focusing on one guys keychain an awful lot. I'll have to check the original version to see if that used to be a gun in those shots. If the keys have replaced the gun then they look pretty good...
I didn't think the 2002 version was too bad, but I'm very glad to have the 1982 version in the cheapy package!
I think it was because of the lack of advertising.
:eek:
:D
The keys were always there. I think "keys" was the original nickname for the character.
I think people were also very wary of Spielberg's CGI enhancements after the Star wars debacle. Any passion they may have had for the movie disappeared when they learned that ET was no longer shooting first. :lol:
Originally posted by jonathan.e
Not sure I would have phrased it quite as directly, but I do agree. Have never been able to see what the fuss is about this kiddie flick then or now.
I'm 31 now so I saw it originally in the cinema and I was the right age to be in the target audience...and I thought it was trash. I thought Star Wars and Indiana Jones were much more fun and ultimately less "girlie".
To be honest, I have never rewatched it, such was my distate then. Perhaps I should give it another go...? Then again perhaps the time can be better spent watching the extras of the four disc FOTR...
it's a kids film and a vastly over-rated one at that imo.
Up till the late 70s and early 80s, it was normal routine for all successful films to be re-released and re-re-released. Video killed that and the advancing technology of DVD and home cinema means that even purists can watch films at home in a version they're happy with. For a film to have a successful cinema re-release today, it needs more than popularity - it has to have a fervent cult following, be a film which is particularly effective on the big screen and inspire wide public curiosity.
The Star Wars trilogy and The Exorcist are the only re-releases in recent years which have done that well. Even A Clockwork Orange wasn't that successful. ET is a much loved film but this isn't enough. Titanic is the most popular film of all time but I don't think a re-release of that, even with extra footage, would drag in many punters. It's hard to think of another old film that would be a huge hit. I don't think the Star Trek films and the new Star Wars films would pull in anyone but hardcore fans if they were re-released.
I'm 31 and I didn't see it in a cinema until this year, as moviegoing was in such decline in 1982 that there were no cinemas in Ballymena left then. I first saw it on pirate video, as I suspect many other people in the UK did.
I think it's wonderful, and the last 20 minutes or so are just about as perfect as a film can be -- one is literally swept onto another plane (IMO). It's Spielberg's masterpiece, and I can't wait to get the DVD.
I do agree with Ol' Blue Eyes, that just being a good film isn't enough to bring in the punters, it also needs to have a rabid following a la Star Wars. Although, even that's no guarantee, as the revamped Star Trek: The Motion Picture went straight to DVD. Surely that was intended for cinema in the first place -- presumably Paramount's research indicated that it wouldn't make any money?
maybe everyone has seen it too many times, I know I have.
Anyway I dont agree with bringing out old films with new CGI scenes just too make money, Star Wars was an exception because it was the first time.
Originally posted by Dene
E.T. is one of the greatest films ever made arguably,
I'd argue with that. ET is one of the most successful films ever made (at the box office). One of the greatest? Not for me - not by a very long way. Hell, it's not even one of Spielberg's greatest
I personally was put off by the replacement of guns by walkie-talkies (was this actually true?) in some scenes.
That was an epsiode of South Park called Free Hat.
I think the whole idea of ET has dated very badly. It has an eighties feel to it, very cheesy and cliche, nothing is fresh or interesting about it in way for kids to go and flock to see it. The kids who saw it when it was first released feel ashamed that they actually shed a tear when they first saw such a manipulative movie that they wouldn't even touch it with a barge pole.
Why pay good money at the cinema to watch an OK film thats on TV all the time?
Originally posted by Here.com people
ET is crap
Scum. You are all scum
Originally posted by Niceguygeoff
I think people were also very wary of Spielberg's CGI enhancements after the Star wars debacle. Any passion they may have had for the movie disappeared when they learned that ET was no longer shooting first. :lol:
Now that is funny. :D
God, I recall seeing this film only because Police Academy 5 was full AND I was the only one laughing out loud in the auditorium when ET died. Naturally my date for the evening did not call me back.
Boink!
Personally, I feel that if you hate this movie, then its difficult to say you like movies.
ET was the first "pirate" film I saw all those years ago. A mate had it on Betamax (god, I feel old), we watched it and thouroughly enjoyed it. When it got it's first cinema screening some months later I watched it again and realised just how much pirate videos ruin a films appearance and to this day haven't watched a pirate film pre cinema release. - So, ET done me the world of good :)
Seen it a couple of times and it's never really done anything for me, just don't enjoy it at all. Not going to go out of my way to watch it again at any time.
Originally posted by Boink!
Now that is funny. :D
God, I recall seeing this film only because Police Academy 5 was full AND I was the only one laughing out loud in the auditorium when ET died. Naturally my date for the evening did not call me back.
Boink!
Eh? :confused:
But the originally Police Academy was released in 1984, 2 years after ET?
I saw ET first on pirate - at school, shown by a teacher :eek:
It taught me vividly that ****** pirate copies of movies utterly ruin them - it was only seeing it properly that I could appreciate the film.
Originally posted by Guiness
Scum. You are all scum
I totally agree with you!:D
ET is definitely in my top 10 movies of all time. It still makes me well up every time I see it - and as someone who saw it when it came out, I'm not ashamed of that, as was implied above. Pretty much a perfect movie for me. It's Spielberg's best for me, and also John Williams' best by far.
However, having just watched the special edition - I'm not going to make that mistake again. I noticed every single change, which IMO were way too obvious and unnecessary. (And back on topic, it was because of this now realised fear that I avoided it at the cinema). Thank god I can watch the normal edition from now on.
But I still feel all warm and fuzzy inside after watching it...
You're all just far too cynical for your own good...
always laughed at the new version the way they replaced the line "you look like a terrorist" too "you look like a hippy" ... from now on I see all hippys as potential terrorists! :)
Originally posted by Goblin
always laughed at the new version the way they replaced the line "you look like a terrorist" too "you look like a hippy" ... from now on I see all hippys as potential terrorists! :)
Check out The Digital Bits review of the film and it takes you to a funny South Park exerpt saying the exact same thing!
I saw it when I was 22 and I still think it's a great movie, childlike without being childish, and very funny as well. I don't think Spielberg has done anything since which even begins to match it for sheer brilliance of technique. The scene in which Elliott manages to not only release the frogs but also find a way to kiss the tallest girl in his class is one of the finest bits of slapstick humour ever achieved in cinema.
I always thought the keys were scarier than the guns anyway.
I'm only buying the DVD because of it's limited availablity, and I collect DVDs.
Can't say I enjoyed it much at the cinema as a kid. It just made me cry.
What's so fun about crying? I ask you.
Originally posted by Ol' Blue Eyes
The Star Wars trilogy and The Exorcist are the only re-releases in recent years which have done that well.
How did the Grease re-release do? I seem to recall that did *very* well.
(oh, and for the record, I saw ET at the cinema way back in the 80s and thought it was manipulative crap. However, seeing it on TV a while back I quite enjoyed it and appreciated it more).
Can't see how it would appeal to kids today. It's just an old film that lacks the special effects quality and action they want (and isn't a cartoon). There's no way it would have succeeded on re-release from a bunch of nostalgic adults (when the Star Wars Special Editions were done, the majority of the cinema audience when I saw them were kids).
Makes a great rental/purchase though for families.
For what it's worth, E.T. was a big influence at the time on someone who was 9. I know :). Good or bad, kids queued around the block at the cinema to watch it and I don't recall ever seeing something like that since. That's why I'm nostalgic about it.
However, E.T. has a big embarresment factor for blokes and I wouldn't bother going to see it at the cinema, but I'd buy the DVD. Personally, looking at it now it's a much better quality 'kids' film than most particularly because it places you in the role of the kid rather that being about the kid(s) and doesn't talk down.
It's a film so full of schmaltz it gags; Spielberg IS capable of decent film (Color Purple, Jaws, Duel) but...
The bookending scenes of Saving Private Ryan, ET, Hook - all of these are syrupy/flag-waving pap...
Kubrick he ain't.
I'd rather watch Starman than E.T these days ... I think the last time I watch E.T was when it was first released in the cinemas all those years ago :)
Kubrick he ain't.
his names Steven Spielberg, you know, the guy who Kubrick begged and kept on pestering him to do a film called AI.
Spielber does it, leaves in Kubricks original ending, people moan, balh blah blah. whatever.
E.T. is one of the greatest films ever made arguably, and judging from its original 1982 box office a massive crowd-pleaser too ($700m worldwide). So how come little interest for its 20th anniversary revamp?
The only reason I can think is that Lucas had always controlled Star Wars so carefully that it had been rarely seen on tv, and along with limited releases on the home market this meant that there was some kudos attached to going to see them again at the flicks. None of this was the case with E.T., which in the UK anyway has been on telly a lot over the years, and it was always easy to pick up on vid also.
However, it's a real shame irrespective of the controversy of Spielberg's changes -- it's a landmark film and I for one wish it had done better.
Answers:
For all its great original box-office ET has never had the staying power of the Starwars films.
I think the mentality of audiences over the past 20 years means action films are likely to be more coveted than drama.
I personally was put off by the replacement of guns by walkie-talkies (was this actually true?) in some scenes.
It is a great film but no series of films will ever match the drawing power of Starwars - not even Indiana Jones, Superman, Bond or the Matrix will draw comparable repeat audiences to the cinema.:)
Answers:
Because it's crap?
Answers:
More like because everyone knew it would come out of DVD. If it's that much loved a film then you're going to buy it right?
Rick McCallum talks about the phenomenum here: http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/17/film.dvd.reut/index.html , suggesting that the industry now relies on revenue from post-release, presumably primarily DVD and video to actually make back the budget. Repeat viewings are way down, and ET's re-release was basically either one big repeat viewing (if you're my age), or of no interest because it's not hyped to hell (if you're in the 'target' age bracket).
The example of the Star Wars re-releases pretty much backs this up. They were pre-DVD (to all intents and purposes) and eminently re-watchable. If they'd come out now I suspect they would have had a much smaller audience as people would assume they were a big ad for the forthcoming DVDs, rightly or wrongly, which is pretty much what ET was (IMHO).
Answers:
Originally posted by beobrand
Because it's crap?
Not sure I would have phrased it quite as directly, but I do agree. Have never been able to see what the fuss is about this kiddie flick then or now.
Answers:
Originally posted by stefmcd
I personally was put off by the replacement of guns by walkie-talkies (was this actually true?) in some scenes.
I didn't notice walkie-talkies when I watched it a couple of evenings ago but the camera did seem to be focusing on one guys keychain an awful lot. I'll have to check the original version to see if that used to be a gun in those shots. If the keys have replaced the gun then they look pretty good...
I didn't think the 2002 version was too bad, but I'm very glad to have the 1982 version in the cheapy package!
Answers:
I think it was because of the lack of advertising.
:eek:
:D
Answers:
The keys were always there. I think "keys" was the original nickname for the character.
Answers:
I think people were also very wary of Spielberg's CGI enhancements after the Star wars debacle. Any passion they may have had for the movie disappeared when they learned that ET was no longer shooting first. :lol:
Answers:
Originally posted by jonathan.e
Not sure I would have phrased it quite as directly, but I do agree. Have never been able to see what the fuss is about this kiddie flick then or now.
I'm 31 now so I saw it originally in the cinema and I was the right age to be in the target audience...and I thought it was trash. I thought Star Wars and Indiana Jones were much more fun and ultimately less "girlie".
To be honest, I have never rewatched it, such was my distate then. Perhaps I should give it another go...? Then again perhaps the time can be better spent watching the extras of the four disc FOTR...
Answers:
it's a kids film and a vastly over-rated one at that imo.
Answers:
Up till the late 70s and early 80s, it was normal routine for all successful films to be re-released and re-re-released. Video killed that and the advancing technology of DVD and home cinema means that even purists can watch films at home in a version they're happy with. For a film to have a successful cinema re-release today, it needs more than popularity - it has to have a fervent cult following, be a film which is particularly effective on the big screen and inspire wide public curiosity.
The Star Wars trilogy and The Exorcist are the only re-releases in recent years which have done that well. Even A Clockwork Orange wasn't that successful. ET is a much loved film but this isn't enough. Titanic is the most popular film of all time but I don't think a re-release of that, even with extra footage, would drag in many punters. It's hard to think of another old film that would be a huge hit. I don't think the Star Trek films and the new Star Wars films would pull in anyone but hardcore fans if they were re-released.
Answers:
I'm 31 and I didn't see it in a cinema until this year, as moviegoing was in such decline in 1982 that there were no cinemas in Ballymena left then. I first saw it on pirate video, as I suspect many other people in the UK did.
I think it's wonderful, and the last 20 minutes or so are just about as perfect as a film can be -- one is literally swept onto another plane (IMO). It's Spielberg's masterpiece, and I can't wait to get the DVD.
I do agree with Ol' Blue Eyes, that just being a good film isn't enough to bring in the punters, it also needs to have a rabid following a la Star Wars. Although, even that's no guarantee, as the revamped Star Trek: The Motion Picture went straight to DVD. Surely that was intended for cinema in the first place -- presumably Paramount's research indicated that it wouldn't make any money?
Answers:
maybe everyone has seen it too many times, I know I have.
Anyway I dont agree with bringing out old films with new CGI scenes just too make money, Star Wars was an exception because it was the first time.
Answers:
Originally posted by Dene
E.T. is one of the greatest films ever made arguably,
I'd argue with that. ET is one of the most successful films ever made (at the box office). One of the greatest? Not for me - not by a very long way. Hell, it's not even one of Spielberg's greatest
Answers:
I personally was put off by the replacement of guns by walkie-talkies (was this actually true?) in some scenes.
That was an epsiode of South Park called Free Hat.
Answers:
I think the whole idea of ET has dated very badly. It has an eighties feel to it, very cheesy and cliche, nothing is fresh or interesting about it in way for kids to go and flock to see it. The kids who saw it when it was first released feel ashamed that they actually shed a tear when they first saw such a manipulative movie that they wouldn't even touch it with a barge pole.
Answers:
Why pay good money at the cinema to watch an OK film thats on TV all the time?
Answers:
Originally posted by Here.com people
ET is crap
Scum. You are all scum
Answers:
Originally posted by Niceguygeoff
I think people were also very wary of Spielberg's CGI enhancements after the Star wars debacle. Any passion they may have had for the movie disappeared when they learned that ET was no longer shooting first. :lol:
Now that is funny. :D
God, I recall seeing this film only because Police Academy 5 was full AND I was the only one laughing out loud in the auditorium when ET died. Naturally my date for the evening did not call me back.
Boink!
Answers:
Personally, I feel that if you hate this movie, then its difficult to say you like movies.
Answers:
ET was the first "pirate" film I saw all those years ago. A mate had it on Betamax (god, I feel old), we watched it and thouroughly enjoyed it. When it got it's first cinema screening some months later I watched it again and realised just how much pirate videos ruin a films appearance and to this day haven't watched a pirate film pre cinema release. - So, ET done me the world of good :)
Answers:
Seen it a couple of times and it's never really done anything for me, just don't enjoy it at all. Not going to go out of my way to watch it again at any time.
Answers:
Originally posted by Boink!
Now that is funny. :D
God, I recall seeing this film only because Police Academy 5 was full AND I was the only one laughing out loud in the auditorium when ET died. Naturally my date for the evening did not call me back.
Boink!
Eh? :confused:
But the originally Police Academy was released in 1984, 2 years after ET?
I saw ET first on pirate - at school, shown by a teacher :eek:
It taught me vividly that ****** pirate copies of movies utterly ruin them - it was only seeing it properly that I could appreciate the film.
Answers:
Originally posted by Guiness
Scum. You are all scum
I totally agree with you!:D
ET is definitely in my top 10 movies of all time. It still makes me well up every time I see it - and as someone who saw it when it came out, I'm not ashamed of that, as was implied above. Pretty much a perfect movie for me. It's Spielberg's best for me, and also John Williams' best by far.
However, having just watched the special edition - I'm not going to make that mistake again. I noticed every single change, which IMO were way too obvious and unnecessary. (And back on topic, it was because of this now realised fear that I avoided it at the cinema). Thank god I can watch the normal edition from now on.
But I still feel all warm and fuzzy inside after watching it...
You're all just far too cynical for your own good...
Answers:
always laughed at the new version the way they replaced the line "you look like a terrorist" too "you look like a hippy" ... from now on I see all hippys as potential terrorists! :)
Answers:
Originally posted by Goblin
always laughed at the new version the way they replaced the line "you look like a terrorist" too "you look like a hippy" ... from now on I see all hippys as potential terrorists! :)
Check out The Digital Bits review of the film and it takes you to a funny South Park exerpt saying the exact same thing!
Answers:
I saw it when I was 22 and I still think it's a great movie, childlike without being childish, and very funny as well. I don't think Spielberg has done anything since which even begins to match it for sheer brilliance of technique. The scene in which Elliott manages to not only release the frogs but also find a way to kiss the tallest girl in his class is one of the finest bits of slapstick humour ever achieved in cinema.
I always thought the keys were scarier than the guns anyway.
Answers:
I'm only buying the DVD because of it's limited availablity, and I collect DVDs.
Can't say I enjoyed it much at the cinema as a kid. It just made me cry.
What's so fun about crying? I ask you.
Answers:
Originally posted by Ol' Blue Eyes
The Star Wars trilogy and The Exorcist are the only re-releases in recent years which have done that well.
How did the Grease re-release do? I seem to recall that did *very* well.
(oh, and for the record, I saw ET at the cinema way back in the 80s and thought it was manipulative crap. However, seeing it on TV a while back I quite enjoyed it and appreciated it more).
Answers:
Can't see how it would appeal to kids today. It's just an old film that lacks the special effects quality and action they want (and isn't a cartoon). There's no way it would have succeeded on re-release from a bunch of nostalgic adults (when the Star Wars Special Editions were done, the majority of the cinema audience when I saw them were kids).
Makes a great rental/purchase though for families.
For what it's worth, E.T. was a big influence at the time on someone who was 9. I know :). Good or bad, kids queued around the block at the cinema to watch it and I don't recall ever seeing something like that since. That's why I'm nostalgic about it.
However, E.T. has a big embarresment factor for blokes and I wouldn't bother going to see it at the cinema, but I'd buy the DVD. Personally, looking at it now it's a much better quality 'kids' film than most particularly because it places you in the role of the kid rather that being about the kid(s) and doesn't talk down.
Answers:
It's a film so full of schmaltz it gags; Spielberg IS capable of decent film (Color Purple, Jaws, Duel) but...
The bookending scenes of Saving Private Ryan, ET, Hook - all of these are syrupy/flag-waving pap...
Kubrick he ain't.
Answers:
I'd rather watch Starman than E.T these days ... I think the last time I watch E.T was when it was first released in the cinemas all those years ago :)
Answers:
Kubrick he ain't.
his names Steven Spielberg, you know, the guy who Kubrick begged and kept on pestering him to do a film called AI.
Spielber does it, leaves in Kubricks original ending, people moan, balh blah blah. whatever.
1 2