The Muse Is on Bad Again
Hollywood seems adamant to profit from remakes and sequels that movie makers accept no business writing, producing or releasing. Rather than working difficult to generate new films — ones with novel plot devices, leads and stories from underrepresented communities and compelling cinematic visions, for instance — the bigwigs of the American film industry are on a mission to chop-chop ruin any remnant of millennial childhood nostalgia.
So, it is with a heavy centre — and in recognition that January 10, 2022, marks six years since the passing of the absolutely legendary and incomparable David Bowie — that I am forced to address the announcement of a Labyrinth sequel. Now, does the original film crave, necessitate or even hint at a sequel? Is the lead actor from the original picture prepared to brand an appearance? Is the original director notwithstanding available? The answer to these questions is a single, resounding "NO." And yet, here we are. Sigh.
Allow me to take a brief moment to discuss why a Labyrinth sequel is an atrocious, terrible, no-good thought.
A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Will Be a Travesty
The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, it'southward going to be missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin King — a.k.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-angle stone star lost a long boxing with liver cancer. His declining health was a well-kept secret, and fans and admirers from all over the world mourned his untimely passing.
If you believe that Bowie's absence from a Labyrinth sequel is more a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the unabridged project, I'd recommend that you lot go dorsum and sentinel the original 1986 flick. Bowie'southward presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and cool charismatic demeanor — the man also wrote and performed more than half of the pic's soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform as Jareth is much like watching him as Ziggy Stardust. It tin can be challenging to separate the truth from the fiction of these performances, as Bowie becomes then engrossed in his characterization that he simply ceases to be himself. Even as an developed, it's hard to watch Jareth the Goblin King prance, dance and sing without occasionally stopping to think, "Wow. That really is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Dance the Magic Trip the light fantastic toe' down my hallway."
I'm sorry, simply information technology's incommunicable for a casting director to find a multitalented actor/musician to fill Bowie'due south shoes in an upcoming sequel. Information technology's also a challenge to imagine any viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would have suddenly changed form. This type of confusion only deepens when because what might become of the Labyrinth's creatures.
Jim Henson, the mastermind behind the Muppets, directed the original Labyrinth film. His masterful puppetry showed a depth of skill unmatched by rival puppeteers, and in a time without impressive CGI graphics, he was one of the become-to guys for practical special effects. Sadly, Henson passed away in 1990. Since that time, there have been no less than five theatrical releases with his charming Muppet characters — and they've all been atrocious.
Some might take those movies every bit a sign that Henson's absenteeism is no big deal when attempting to make a sequel. They would be incredibly wrong. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would be like a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you cartel, 20th Century Fox!) Just finish thinking about it and appreciate this magic for what it is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth film without using Henson'southward puppets would be similar George Lucas abandoning applied puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated figurer graphics. Oh…that'due south already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who take grown up watching a specific film are bound to feel slighted, misunderstood or only plain cheated when that film ends up lost in technological translation.
Not convinced that fans don't want a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Take a expect at how The Lion King fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "live-activity"' Disney remake. Here'due south a spoiler: They didn't similar it.
A Project Fueled by Profits, Non Passions
All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives greenish-lighting so many '80s remakes and sequels right now?" Unfortunately, the answer lies in nostalgia-based profit. Academics have long studied consumer behavior, and information technology seems that contempo studies take non fallen on deaf ears.
In 2014, the Journal of Consumer Research published findings on the connection betwixt nostalgia and money-spending habits. They discovered that people are more willing to spend money when they're feeling sentimental or nostalgic. Advertising executives and motion-picture show producers have taken this tidbit of data and run with it.
That'southward why our current film industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, particularly to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are at present total-fledged adults with existential dread about the future every bit climate change, pandemics and political chaos leave generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.
But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (remember Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the moving picture manufacture would rather take existing intellectual property and rebrand it for the younger generation. In most cases, the event is an alienated original audience and a disinterested youth. This is all done in the name of and for the sake of turn a profit.
So Please, Exit This Gem of a Picture Alone
A moving-picture show shouldn't exist pre-judged as good or bad, of course, just should instead be judged by its merit, reception and lasting impact. Still, even the nearly advanced hologram applied science could not revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD IT). And no corporeality of CGI could replace the authenticity and wonder of Henson'due south creations.
The only thing that could remain consistent betwixt the original Labyrinth motion-picture show and its proposed sequel is its chief screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). But as of this moment, there'southward no word from the crumbling Brit equally to his possible interest in writing a sequel.
Equally a event, there's little hope that a Labyrinth 2 would exist anything more than than a shameless, soulless greenbacks grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger world that lay before them during the '80s. Any project based on turn a profit, non passion, is doomed to neglect, and that's why I'k non looking forward to the mess of a sequel that undoubtedly lies alee.
Source: https://www.ask.com/entertainment/labyrinth-sequel-bad-idea?utm_content=params%3Ao%3D740004%26ad%3DdirN%26qo%3DserpIndex
0 Response to "The Muse Is on Bad Again"
Post a Comment