PDA

View Full Version : The Munsters (again)



NEOWatcher
2010-Sep-30, 05:20 PM
Can't these people let a title rest?
NBC, Bryan Fuller remaking 'The Munsters' (http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/30/munsters.remake.ew/index.html?hpt=Sbin)

Either the Munsters have been overdone, or they are coming up with an exciting new way to do it. I feel that if it's the latter, it would probably be different enough that it should get it's own name.

If the former, then haven't we been numbed by the following:
Here Come the Munsters (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113296/) (1995)
The Munsters Scary Little Christmas (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117109/) (1996)
The Munsters Revenge (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082778/) (1981)
Munster, Go Home (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060726/) (1966)
The Munsters Today (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094518/) (1988-91)

Swift
2010-Sep-30, 07:06 PM
I hated the Munsters from the start; I always thought of them as a cheap, stupid and bad imitation of the Addams Family. I can't begin to imagine how stupid the remakes have been (or will be).

PetersCreek
2010-Sep-30, 07:16 PM
I kind of liked the Munsters but a lot of that may have been due to liking Fred Gwynne in the role of Herman Munster. On the other hand, Eddie was just creepy...and not in a Munsteresque way.

NEOWatcher
2010-Sep-30, 07:17 PM
I hated the Munsters from the start; I always thought of them as a cheap, stupid and bad imitation of the Addams Family. I can't begin to imagine how stupid the remakes have been (or will be).

I've always had that opinion myself. (probably why I was prompted to post a rant about it)

I think it stems from the fact that the Addams' (for the most part) can visually pass as normal people.
Then, of course, they were just plain fun where the Munsters always seemed to have society issues.

Swift
2010-Sep-30, 07:46 PM
Then, of course, they were just plain fun where the Munsters always seemed to have society issues.
I was also a big fan of Charles Addams from early childhood - my parents used to get the New Yorker, which carried his cartoons, and we had several books of his cartoons, which I read as a child.

JustAFriend
2010-Sep-30, 09:44 PM
The remakes died before.

The networks are just trying to exploit the memories of the aging Baby Boom generation.

It'll die again.

(besides with Fred Gwynne and Al Lewis gone, the heart and humor of the program is gone. Let it rest.)

Van Rijn
2010-Sep-30, 11:34 PM
Can't these people let a title rest?
NBC, Bryan Fuller remaking 'The Munsters' (http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/30/munsters.remake.ew/index.html?hpt=Sbin)

Either the Munsters have been overdone, or they are coming up with an exciting new way to do it. I feel that if it's the latter, it would probably be different enough that it should get it's own name.


There you go - an edgier, darker Munsters reboot: Grandpa is a truly evil vampire that eats people, Herman is a terminator, Lilly is a Goa'uld, Eddie is an insane Romulan, and Marilyn is a Cylon and she has a plan.

Or something like that.

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Oct-03, 08:14 PM
This has happened before and it will happen again.

SkepticJ
2010-Oct-03, 08:18 PM
What's next, Gilligan's Island?

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Oct-03, 08:25 PM
In the new Gilligan's Island, Gilligan has add, the skipper has diabetes and only has a limited supply of insulin, Ginger wants to be a man, the Professor is a serial killer, the millionaire has a secret satellite phone and Mary Ann is going to have a baby but no one know who the father is.

hawaii50girl
2010-Oct-03, 11:06 PM
Why can't they leave stuff like this alone. I love watching The Munsters and I don't want to see a remake of it at all. Already one of my favorite television shows Hawaii Five-O has been remade. Butch Patrick says he can't seeing it work out unless NBC gets Brad Garrett as Herman. I can totally see Brad Garrett as Herman.

http://www.tmz.com/2010/10/01/eddie-munster-tv-show-remake-attack-slam

Swift
2010-Oct-04, 01:17 PM
Why can't they leave stuff like this alone.
My theory, for quite some time, is that there one brain in Hollywood (and not a very good one) and it is shared by about 23,746 scriptwriters.

BigDon
2010-Oct-04, 03:43 PM
Gee, don't watch it then.

I like the actor they have playing Herman. He's a natural for the role. Voice is right and everything.

NEOWatcher
2010-Oct-04, 05:13 PM
Gee, don't watch it then.
It's not really a matter of watch/don't watch. It's the problem that with every iteration, the original get's cheapened.
If I were to mention "the Munsters" after a remake, then the context gets lost and/or twisted. Somebody growing up with the new versions may not have a clue of what it started off as, and the originals will get tossed to the wayside.

And; if the new iteration is as bad as some of these tend to be, then there would be additional incentive to not mention the original at all for fear of being ridiculed.

Just look at Star Wars, and talk to someone who has experienced it from the JarJar era. The perception is very different.

BigDon
2010-Oct-04, 07:12 PM
Just look at Star Wars, and talk to someone who has experienced it from the JarJar era. The perception is very different.

No country for old men, eh?

Swift
2010-Oct-04, 09:32 PM
Gee, don't watch it then.
I don't. I don't watch the vast majority of what is put in movies theatres or on TV now. And that's fine, I don't really care; if it makes other people or the producers in Hollywood happy, that's fine. I'm not advocating a constitutional amendment or anything.

But I thought the purpose of many of these kinds of threads was just general purpose bellyaching and moaning. I'm just trying to do my part. And if I don't, how am I going to collect enough curmudgeon points to become a Grand Master Curmudgeon? I mean Andy Rooney won't live forever.

:D

mike alexander
2010-Oct-04, 10:42 PM
Didn't like the Original. Like Swift, I saw it as a "Oh, God, they have a monster show, we need one, too!"

And the Addams' weren't monsters, just agreeably eccentric.

hawaii50girl
2010-Oct-05, 12:37 AM
My theory, for quite some time, is that there one brain in Hollywood (and not a very good one) and it is shared by about 23,746 scriptwriters.

Yeah that's what I am thinking too.

Jim
2010-Oct-05, 05:43 PM
Yeah that's what I am thinking too.

There's something ironic about this statement with your signature.

Actually, I wouldn't blame the writers. It's the network/company executives who make the decisions... the same folks who couldn't write an original story unless it was based on their expense accounts. What they want is not originality or creativity. They want a sure-fire hit (aka, money maker). The easiest way to get that is to rehash a previous money maker.

mike alexander
2010-Oct-05, 05:47 PM
I went back to look and found that both shows only lasted two seasons. (I surprised myself, at least re: Munsters)
This suggests that whatever the golden memories, at the time they weren't great long-term successes.

NEOWatcher
2010-Oct-05, 05:50 PM
Actually, I wouldn't blame the writers. It's the network/company executives who make the decisions... the same folks who couldn't write an original story unless it was based on their expense accounts. What they want is not originality or creativity. They want a sure-fire hit (aka, money maker). The easiest way to get that is to rehash a previous money maker.
I don't think producing it is any easier, because you do have to make an effort to fit the characterizations rather than build the personalities around the actors you get.

But; It is a world easier to publicize. They seem to think that if you can sell the hype, then people will watch.
They're probably right, but that doesn't exactly extend to keeping them watching.

hawaii50girl
2010-Oct-05, 11:15 PM
There's something ironic about this statement with your signature.

Actually, I wouldn't blame the writers. It's the network/company executives who make the decisions... the same folks who couldn't write an original story unless it was based on their expense accounts. What they want is not originality or creativity. They want a sure-fire hit (aka, money maker). The easiest way to get that is to rehash a previous money maker.

What do you mean by that it is ironic about my statement with the signature I have? Do you mean because of the new version of Hawaii Five-0 that is airing? I only like the original but I am giving the new show a chance. The only reason why I have that as my signature is because I love Hawaii Five-O.