Disney to remake Sister Act

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Riceball

Sr Member

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Solo4114

Master Member
Famous-characters-Troll-face-Challenge-accepted-140949.jpg

I have no particular love for the source material, but it just highlights the creative bankruptcy of producers and studio execs anymore. I know that there are new movies without a "name" attached to them, but so much of what I see announced here is branded properties. It's disheartening.
 

LrdSatyr8

Sr Member
I think what all these studios need to do is pull out all of those scripts that they've thrown away and are sitting in their file 13 and go thru them. I mean REALLY go thru them for a change. They are all looking for easy money. The best way to easy money is remake and reboot old stuff. But so many times they get these scripts sent to them they never read, and just throw away because they weren't sent thru proper channels or they just appeared for no reason by some good writer who just hoped that it would be accepted. I wonder just how many of those types of scripts were never even looked at?
 

Riceball

Sr Member
I think what all these studios need to do is pull out all of those scripts that they've thrown away and are sitting in their file 13 and go thru them. I mean REALLY go thru them for a change. They are all looking for easy money. The best way to easy money is remake and reboot old stuff. But so many times they get these scripts sent to them they never read, and just throw away because they weren't sent thru proper channels or they just appeared for no reason by some good writer who just hoped that it would be accepted. I wonder just how many of those types of scripts were never even looked at?
That would be a great idea except that there's a reason why they File 13 scripts without reading them that are sent to them out of the blue, it's to protect the studios from lawsuits. If they read some random script, send a rejection letter out, and later make a movie that's similar, it opens them up to lawsuits by writers claiming that they (the studio) stole their material/idea. It happens all the time and by having a policy of not reading and trashing unsolicited scripts it gives them a certain amount of protection, it allows them to go to court and tell the judge that it's their policy to not read and trash unsolicited scripts so it's pure coincidence that their new movie is similar to some random dude's script.

- - - Updated - - -

I think that this is a perfect opportunity to really change this movie up and recast Whoopi's character with a white man, that would have so many people up in arms and screaming, I'd love to see the controversy that would cause. And in order to keep the name, Sister Act, have the white male actor cross dress as a woman, now you have Mrs. Doubtfire meets Sister Act and the potential to **** off even more people. :D
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Solo4114

Master Member
That would be a great idea except that there's a reason why they File 13 scripts without reading them that are sent to them out of the blue, it's to protect the studios from lawsuits. If they read some random script, send a rejection letter out, and later make a movie that's similar, it opens them up to lawsuits by writers claiming that they (the studio) stole their material/idea. It happens all the time and by having a policy of not reading and trashing unsolicited scripts it gives them a certain amount of protection, it allows them to go to court and tell the judge that it's their policy to not read and trash unsolicited scripts so it's pure coincidence that their new movie is similar to some random dude's script.
Anderson v. Stallone. Case in point.

I think that this is a perfect opportunity to really change this movie up and recast Whoopi's character with a white man, that would have so many people up in arms and screaming, I'd love to see the controversy that would cause. And in order to keep the name, Sister Act, have the white male actor cross dress as a woman, now you have Mrs. Doubtfire meets Sister Act and the potential to **** off even more people. :D
Cameron Crowe is already WAY ahead of you, casting a white actress to play a hapa character. ;)
 

LrdSatyr8

Sr Member
That would be a great idea except that there's a reason why they File 13 scripts without reading them that are sent to them out of the blue, it's to protect the studios from lawsuits. If they read some random script, send a rejection letter out, and later make a movie that's similar, it opens them up to lawsuits by writers claiming that they (the studio) stole their material/idea. It happens all the time and by having a policy of not reading and trashing unsolicited scripts it gives them a certain amount of protection, it allows them to go to court and tell the judge that it's their policy to not read and trash unsolicited scripts so it's pure coincidence that their new movie is similar to some random dude's script.
I would assume the author of the script would be contacted and compensated properly... would make more sense then to take that script and change it to make it appear as if it's theirs. Another thing, why not start writing screen plays based on old sci-fi novels. I would love to see a big screen adaptation of Titan by John Varley... if you haven't read it... check it out... is worth the read! I really don't think that Hollywood needs to reboot/remake all these old movies that we loved. Leave them alone! I mean comon, do you really think a male version of Leonardo's Mona Lisa would be worth as much as the original? No! Give us something new... not another rehash of what we've already seen.

- - - Updated - - -

As far as Sister Act is concerned... instead of remaking the movie... why not just continue the story? I would love to see a Sister Act 3... and this time she becomes a Saint! She's already performed 2 miracles... one more and she's up for Sainthood!
 

Riceball

Sr Member
Cameron Crowe is already WAY ahead of you, casting a white actress to play a hapa character. ;)
I saw that, and at first I thought, WTF! I like Emma Stone and all, but there's no way she could play half-Chinese, half-Hawaiian character, but then I realized she's only 1/4 Chinese & Hawaiian, which still seemed a bit outrageous until I thought of my niece who is half-Chinese, half-White but you'd never tell from looking at her, and my wife has cousins who are also half-Chinese and don't look the least bit Asian. Then there's the matter that the movie seems to be based on a true(?) story of a hapa girl who had to convince people all her life that she was indeed a hapa and not just another White girl.
 
Last edited:

Solo4114

Master Member
I saw that, and at first I thought, WTF! I like Emma Stone and all, but there's no way she could play half Chinese half Hawaiian character, but then a I realized she's only 1/4 Chinese & Hawaiian, which still seemed a bit outrageous until I thought of my niece who is half-Chinese, half-White but you'd never tell from looking at her, and my wife has cousins who are also half-Chinese and don't look the least bit Asian. Then there's the matter that the movie seems to be based on a true(?) story of a hapa girl who had to convince people all her life that she was indeed a hapa and not just another White girl.
Yeah, my fiance is hapa, but "first generation" hapa, so she looks "ambiguously ethnic" (to quote Parks & Rec). But I do recognize that, like, our kids could possibly end up looking more like me (generic euromutt) rather than her.

The thing I'm gathering (from all the backlash on Aloha is that there are two main objections to the film. First, that it's all about white people (even if one of them is a "white" hapa person) -- hence the "Haoles" fake poster (which was brilliant), and doesn't actually deal that much with native Hawaiians or the wide range of racial mixes on the islands. But second, that -- apparently -- the character's racial identity ends up not playing a huge role in the film, or at least that the whole "I have to justify that I am, indeed, part Asian, even though I look northern European, and this is something which informs how my character lives her life" thing isn't really as emphasized. If it is, it's apparently not done in effective enough of a way to get people's attention.

Then again, I thought the outrage over Black Widow's "monster" comments in Age of Ultron was basically just people not understanding the scene, and the product of internet echochambers, so who knows. Maybe it's handled better in the movie than the news is making it seem. Regardless, I've heard it's a crappy movie anyway, so I'll probably skip it.


Back on topic...

LrdSatyr8, if you're suggesting that, rather than file scripts unread, the studios dig through the scripts, read them, and then make them into films, that's probably not going to work because....then they'll have read the scripts. Which means that for any scripts that don't get produced, if a subsequent movie is similar enough, they'll have to fend off a possible lawsuit. Even if they win, that costs time and money. It's just easier to reject anything that doesn't go through "proper channels."

I get what you're saying -- that there are probably a TON of original ideas out there that nobody's turning into films -- but I don't think Hollywood gives a crap. To the extent that they did, they'd probably just wrap an existing IP around the original idea to market it. That's how things seem to work nowadays. You need an existing IP to market a film, even if it's a (holy crap I'm old!) 23 year old film. Actually, these days, especially if it's a 23 year old film, since the 18-25 crowd will have never seen it, since they don't believe any worthwhile movies predate their life experiences.

Now GET OFF MY LAWN!
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

robn1

Master Member
It's not enough to just reject an unwanted script. They have to return it unopened, otherwise they could never prove that they didn't read it.
 

The Mad Professor

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I wonder who's going to complain about this one?
I am.

While I may not have liked the movie's religious overtones (say what you want, it had plenty), it was a fun and enjoyable movie to watch. I might not have any reservations about it except that it's being made specifically by Disney.

To me, the most intriguing thing about the original was the lifestyle of the nuns of the Catholic Church juxtaposed against the harsh realities of organized crime. The bad guys were very serious bad guys who killed. I worry that Disney will mismanage that juxtaposition by watering down the bad guys and making the movie more lighthearted than it should be.

The original was very lighthearted, yes, but much of that was due to the stark and grim gangster world.

Another issue I have is with the casting. The original had a FANTASTIC cast aside from Whoopi Goldberg, including Maggie Smith as the all-business Mother Superior, Kathy Najimy as the perennially cheerful Sister Mary Patrick, Mary Wickes as the crabby musical director Sister Mary Lazarus, and Wendy Makkena as Sister Mary Robert, the shy and meek novitiate with the surprising powerhouse singing voice.

That was lightning in a bottle as far as casting goes. Disney is going to be hard-pressed to find another cast that worked as well as they did.

Frankly, I'm not holding out much hope in that regard.
 

jarroth

Sr Member
why all these remakes? i bet there are more than enough talented new script/story writers to draw inspiration from. to me its like trying to re-invent coffee. while some new coffee inventions are quite nice, nothing beats good old plain coffee.

i write short novels as hobby and although some might be simular to already writen stories. i dont care about that i write them cause i just like to write them. i do have ideas writen wich i am pretty sure they are my originals. and if i as hobby writer can make up new stuff, why cant hollywood?
 

robn1

Master Member
It's not that Hollyweird can't come up with new ideas, they just have no desire to. They've gotten stuck in the mindset that they can only have success with an established property. Completely forgetting that even established properties were new at one time, and wouldn't exist if someone hadn't given those new ideas a chance to begin with.

The old approach was if a new movie or show came out and was successful, the other studios would make something similar to cash in on the trend. Now they just buy the rights to that property and simply remake it.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

CB2001

Master Member
But wasn't Sister Act box office success? I mean, the budget on the film was $31 million and earned $231,605,150. For a "not so good movie," it must have done something right.
 

The Mad Professor

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
But wasn't Sister Act box office success? I mean, the budget on the film was $31 million and earned $231,605,150. For a "not so good movie," it must have done something right.
People's opinions on and tastes in movies are as varied as people themselves. What some call fantastic, others find appallingly bad, and they are both right and wrong.

In other words: Opinions are like buttholes. Everyone's got one and they all stink.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top