Never Be Remade: Kubrick – A Remake Analysis

I’ve pretty much resigned to the fact there cannot be some twit, some where, who is attempting to crank out a screenplay based on some previous film. I was originally planning to call this article “Why they’ll never Remake ‘Star Wars’”, but there’s this tiny unsettling in my stomach about this –  small tremor in the Force – One day Star Wars WILL get remade. Whether it be animated, or in stop motion, or some other silly novelty, Star Wars will be released upon the masses once again. It’s even starting now… With pretty much every conceivable story thread filmed and released on fan websites, amateur directors are now assembling fan-edits of the original films. There’s one being assembled right now that has each contributor donate 15 seconds of one scene. Some of the results are pretty cool, others are downright bad.

I had to go to a old friend of mine here on GBUF: Stanley Kubrick. I’d like to say NO Stanley Kubrick film could get a remake, but so far, there’s been a surprisingly lot of remakes. Here’s my short list of Kubrick films, and their remake status:

“Lolita” : Adrian Lyne remade this film in the late 90s. It wasn’t well received and was a considerable flop. The subject matter had a lot to do with this.

“Spartacus” series on STARZ TV. I haven’t seen “Blood and Sand”, and does it really follow a remake mold? Spartacus was an actual historical figure. Do they borrow lots of story from the Kubrick film? I’ll need to follow up on this one.

“Dr. Strangeglove”. Nothing done yet with this property, but I have a feeling there will be something in the future. Probably starring Somebody like Mike Myers in the Peter Sellers role (s).

A Clockwork Orange”. Too topical to bury forever. I feel we’ll get a remake eventually… probably as a BBC mini-series.

“The Shining”: Remade in 1997 with the dude from ‘Wings’ going batshit crazy. This is one film that deserved to be remade, as the source material (Stephen King’s 1979 tome) deviated considerably from what Kubrick brought to the screen in 1980. Although we were treated to a more definitive literary translation, we begin to realize why Kubrick excised certain stuff (killer topiary).

That leaves a few others like “Barry Lyndon”, “Full Metal Jacket”, and “Eyes Wide Shut”. Sure these could get remade some day, but I’m not devoting an article to something so far out that it’s all speculative. I needed a film that would work as a remake today BUT would never get remade.

That leaves the grand-daddy of Kubrick films – the 1968 classic “2001 – A Space Odyssey”. It has everything modern audiences plop their asses into seats for. Lets look at a few things…

Killer Robots: Hal 2000

People can’t get enough of killer robots nowadays. Hal 2000 bridged the gap from the classic mindless automaton from 1950s classics such as Robot Monster to the devious and conniving contraptions we’ve seen in Transformers and Terminator. The cool and empathetic voice of Hal lent a personable quality to its character; not the twangy and electronic voices of past.

Outer Space Setting

Not just spaceships – But cool, realistic stuff that felt like we could actually climb into and fly around. For big box office, space IS the place.

Alien Mythology

The eerie Monoliths in 2001 were a remnant of an old alien race. This concept has been done countless times in the subsequent decades. The Good (Alien), the Bad (Mission to Mars), and the Ugly (Kingdom of the Crystal Skull).

So why can’t I see 2001 getting a remake? First of all, the iconic value of the imagery that has been ingrained in our minds. How could someone possibly try to remake the Monoliths, or the beautifully simplistic design of HAL 2000, or even the Discovery One space craft. Any attempt would be impossible due to our connection to the originals. Add to this an unforgettable soundtrack that is as famous as the film itself.

Let’s pretend someone got around the imagery and soundtrack hurdle and actual started to put a new 2001 together (and yes, it would have to be called something like 2030 due to us passing the original date). Would the overlying story work with today’s audiences? The answer is unquestionably ‘No’. 2001 is about the Dawn of space travel, and space travel takes a really long time to get anywhere. 2001 was basically one long ride to Jupiter, and audiences were willing to go for that ride back in 1968 because space was so fresh and unexplored. Everything about space was new and exciting – Heck, the moon landing wouldn’t even happen for another year. This was before internet and Entertainment Tonight; audiences would go into this film with little preview of the images. They were curious. They were excited to embark on this new discovery. That was 1968.

Remember the film “Apollo 13” (1995). How even by the early 70s, people began to become bored of the moon missions. Television viewership of NASA missions dropped to epic lows since the first moon landing. Space exploration was no longer interesting. Releasing 2001 a few years later would have had similar effect on its popularity. I think its 1968 release was the best time it could ever have come out.

We’ve seen films come out with similar themes. “2010: The Year We Make Contact” (1984) tried to follow the story arc laid out by 2001 writer Arthur C Clarke. It has much of the same elements, but never reached a large fan base.

What do you think? Could there be a remake of 2001? Let me know your thoughts and I’ll add them to this article.