How Do You Know if Eggs Are Bad
Hollywood seems determined to turn a profit from remakes and sequels that motion picture makers have no business organization 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 case — the bigwigs of the American motion picture industry are on a mission to quickly ruin any remnant of millennial babyhood nostalgia.
So, information technology is with a heavy heart — and in recognition that Jan 10, 2021, marks v 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 moving-picture show require, necessitate or even hint at a sequel? Is the lead role player from the original picture prepared to make an appearance? Is the original director still 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 awful, terrible, no-expert idea.
A Bowie-Less Labyrinth Sequel Volition Be a Travesty
The upcoming Labyrinth sequel faces some tough challenges. For starters, it's going to be missing its eternal, androgynous Jareth the Goblin Male monarch — a.thousand.a. the incomparable David Bowie. In 2016, the iconic genre- and gender-bending stone star lost a long battle with liver cancer. His failing health was a well-kept secret, and fans and admirers from all over the globe mourned his untimely passing.
If you believe that Bowie's absenteeism from a Labyrinth sequel is more a casting challenge than a reason to cancel the entire projection, I'd recommend that yous become dorsum and watch the original 1986 film. Bowie'southward presence extends beyond his insanely flustered hairdo, gigantic codpiece and absurd charismatic demeanor — the man also wrote and performed more than than one-half of the movie's soundtrack.
Seeing Bowie perform equally Jareth is much like watching him as Ziggy Stardust. It tin be challenging to divide the truth from the fiction of these performances, equally Bowie becomes so engrossed in his characterization that he simply ceases to be himself. Even every bit an adult, information technology's difficult to watch Jareth the Goblin King prance, dance and sing without occasionally stopping to call up, "Wow. That actually is David Bowie. And, yes, I will 'Dance the Magic Trip the light fantastic toe' downwards my hallway."
I'g sorry, but it'due south incommunicable for a casting director to find a multitalented actor/musician to fill Bowie'due south shoes in an upcoming sequel. It's also a challenge to imagine any viable reason why the original — seemingly immortal — Goblin King would take suddenly changed course. This blazon of confusion just deepens when considering what might become of the Labyrinth'due south creatures.
Jim Henson, the mastermind backside 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 1 of the go-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 mannerly Muppet characters — and they've all been awful.
Some might take those movies as a sign that Henson's absence is no big deal when attempting to brand a sequel. They would be incredibly incorrect. A Labyrinth sequel without Bowie AND Jim Henson would be like a Mrs. Doubtfire sequel without Robin Williams. (Don't you dare, 20th Century Trick!) Just stop thinking about information technology and capeesh this magic for what it is!
Making a sequel to the Labyrinth moving-picture show without using Henson'due south puppets would exist like George Lucas abandoning applied puppetry from his Star Wars franchise in favor of poorly-generated computer graphics. Oh…that'due south already happened, and the response has been less-than-stellar. Fans who have grown up watching a specific moving picture are jump to feel slighted, misunderstood or just plain cheated when that pic ends up lost in technological translation.
Non convinced that fans don't desire a CGI-heavy Labyrinth remake? Take a wait at how The Lion Male monarch fanbase (and critics) reacted to the CGI "alive-action"' Disney remake. Here'southward a spoiler: They didn't like it.
A Project Fueled by Profits, Not Passions
All of this begs the question, "Why are these executives green-lighting so many '80s remakes and sequels right now?" Unfortunately, the answer lies in nostalgia-based turn a profit. Academics take long studied consumer behavior, and it seems that recent studies have non fallen on deaf ears.
In 2014, the Periodical of Consumer Research published findings on the connection between nostalgia and money-spending habits. They discovered that people are more than willing to spend money when they're feeling sentimental or cornball. Advertising executives and picture show producers have taken this tidbit of data and run with it.
That's why our current picture industry is flooded with remakes and unasked-for sequels, especially to icons from the 1980s and 1990s. Children from that era are now full-fledged adults with existential dread well-nigh the future as climate alter, pandemics and political chaos leave generations clamoring for familiar, comforting nostalgia.
But rather than re-releasing original footage on updated media (call up Blu-ray and 4K downloads), the flick industry would rather accept existing intellectual property and rebrand it for the younger generation. In almost cases, the result is an alienated original audition and a disinterested youth. This is all washed in the name of and for the sake of turn a profit.
So Delight, Exit This Gem of a Film Alone
A picture shouldn't be pre-judged as proficient or bad, of course, merely should instead exist judged by its merit, reception and lasting impact. Nonetheless, even the most advanced hologram technology could not revive Bowie's onscreen presence (NOR SHOULD Information technology). And no amount of CGI could replace the authenticity and wonder of Henson's creations.
The but thing that could remain consistent between the original Labyrinth motion picture and its proposed sequel is its chief screenwriter, Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame and glory). Just as of this moment, there'due south no discussion from the crumbling Brit equally to his possible involvement in writing a sequel.
Every bit a effect, at that place'south fiddling hope that a Labyrinth ii would be anything more than than a shameless, soulless greenbacks grab aimed at adults who long for the simpler, stranger earth that lay before them during the '80s. Whatever projection based on turn a profit, non passion, is doomed to fail, and that's why I'k not looking forrad 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