The series is a departure from the tone of the film. It's trying to cram in gags in the hope some might hit and then pushing things on so we forget the jokes that miss. The movie was part of my childhood. It was fantasy, comedy, and elements of horror (shocking but not nightmare-inducing), and it felt like the bandits were a family when they started riling each other and coming to blows when things went wrong, but ultimately getting it together to resolve issues. This, this is just Taika Waititi trying to create jobs for Jemaine Clement. Terry Gilliam was clever in his casting, finding actors who could exist on the same level and require the same shot composition as the main character. Keeping the camera at a child's height to demonstrate how large the elements of the world were.
The Fisher King is one my favourite films! Terry Gilliam has that ability to be serious when he needs to be and always appropriately, rather than as a convenience or just as a "moment".
I was really looking forward to this series as Time Bandits was one of my favourite movies when I was a kid, I too don't understand why suddenly the bandits have been replaced by full sized actors when the original actors worked so well because of their size. Looking at the trailer I am unfortunately underwhelmed by what I've so far seen, I read that Terry Gilliam was an executive producer on this project, whatever that means, its just a shame that he didn't direct it.
Don't understand how Waititi has remained popular. His entire shtick is "have a character(s) act out of place for the mood of a scene and it's funny" ad nauseum.
If the original time bandits film had never existed, and you only saw this trailer you'd probably think of it as a pretty forgettable kids show. It's not going to be awful, it may even have its moments, but no one is going to be talking about this show in 20 years. It's a perfect example of modern tv/film, made to be disposable. Hollywood has lost the ability to make classics that stand the test of time and can be enjoyed by kids and adults.
It hurts. I suppose a remake was inevitable, but it is like someone trying to cover a song Roy Orbison sang. Good luck with that. I guess Big Trouble in Little China will be next.
They've been trying to get a Big Trouble remake or sequel off the ground for a while now. The last I heard, The Rock was supposed to be the lead attached. No doubt it was written as big, goofy, and dumb... Well, either that or way too gritty, serious, and self-important.
@@NeilChaseFilm Ouch. The Rock at his best is amazing, but I really can't see it. Ok, let's double down and see how the Hollywood version of Kung Fu Hustle works out. :) That movie has layers beyond layers and wild references. Even the casting is part of the wild range of references. I loved the movie so much, but I am assured that I missed out on more than I got.
This looks like crap. I loved the original Time Bandits. The humour was sofisticated and evil was multi layered and the world's seemed real and the jeopardy seemed real. This new one looks like Pheobe from friends leads a a band of comedy relief through situational opportunities to make cheap shallow cultural jokes that aren't funny.
Great reaction. Like many other remakes this looks like it has removed all of the soul of the original and just plastered it's skin over a sub-par rehashing of the same story. Movies and other media have always pilfered the past for inspiration and many remakes / re-tellings have been made over the years, some good, most bad, but many recent examples all suffer from the "the characters are aware they're in the "______" movie. For example when she says "We're the Time Bandits...", I may be wrong but I don't think that they used that phrase in the original. Another recent example that comes to mind is the History of the World Part 2, that was so different in tone that it bore almost no resemblance to the original Mel Brooks film. I don't understand why the decision to change the lead characters from little people to random diverse actors is being made for properties where the little people are integral part of why the movie worked in the first place (Time Bandits, Snow White, etc.). And including them in a minor supporting role as you've pointed out is even more offensive than excluding them outright IMHO. While they are almost impossible to replace, there are surely actors out there today who could try to fill the shoes of the David Rappaport's, Kenny Baker's, Malcolm Dixon's, Jack Purvis's & Billy Barty's of the world. Wouldn't a project like this be the perfect vehicle to showcase little known actors with dwarfism? As much as I like and admire Peter Dinklage, he can't be the only actor available for these type of roles. Another thing that seems to detract from the experience is the "feeling" of projects that are shot on film versus those that re done all digital. The newer stuff is all too clean to the point the nothing looks or feels real. I'm old enough to have seen the original in theaters and have been a huge Terry Gilliam fan since first seeing Monty Python's Flying Circus and the Holy Grail on PBS in the 70's. There are so many quotes from the original movie that I still use today that make me chuckle just thinking about how they were originally delivered, somehow I don't see that being the case with this remake. Just my 2 cents.
Great insight! And I especially agree that remakes for the most part lost the charm of the originals, even if by default. It takes the right combination of writing, direction and acting to elevate a remake above the original (The Thing comes to mind right away) - but that takes skill and passion, which are severely lacking (or restricted) these days.
@@NeilChaseFilm I've now had the misfortune of watching the first couple of episodes and I cannot believe that anyone on the production all the way up to the top, thought that this was a good idea. The biggest problem with it so far (and I'm guessing this won't get any better as the show goes on) is that it's 99% tell and very little show. Doesn't that break the golden rule of good story telling? Nothing like one of the main characters dumping a bunch of exposition every time there's a change of scenery. It also suffers from one of the points of failure of a lot of re-makes or copies in that the pace and cadence of British speaking and cultural humor almost never really translates when spoken with an American accent (see American versions of Coupling, Faulty Towers, etc.). Maybe I'm nitpicking, but another thing that bothers me it that the transitions when they time jump are nowhere near as funny since they all appear to teleport instead of falling from an opening in the sky into the ocean or into a barn. Part of the humor of the original was them all piling onto each other and straightening themselves out as they all got up, fixating uniforms, hats, etc. Taking shots at each other in the process. I thought that the concept of the translating hat was a good idea, kinda like the Babel fish in Hitchhiker's Guide, it solves a real problem with an albeit easy plot device, but at least it make sense. In the original we're left to suspend disbelief that everyone speaks and or understands English. The actor playing Kevin seems to be the most invested and immersed in the role and is fun to watch, even though they make him a full on kid-boss and everything he says to historical figures is immediately accepted, there's no tension or conflict and everyone just goes along without question just because... I wanted to give it a chance, but all in all, it falls flat and I may not finish the series out of apathy. Call me what you like, but to quote Ian Holmes' Napoleon, "Little things hitting each other. THAT's WHAT I LIKE!!"
The series is a departure from the tone of the film. It's trying to cram in gags in the hope some might hit and then pushing things on so we forget the jokes that miss.
The movie was part of my childhood. It was fantasy, comedy, and elements of horror (shocking but not nightmare-inducing), and it felt like the bandits were a family when they started riling each other and coming to blows when things went wrong, but ultimately getting it together to resolve issues.
This, this is just Taika Waititi trying to create jobs for Jemaine Clement.
Terry Gilliam was clever in his casting, finding actors who could exist on the same level and require the same shot composition as the main character. Keeping the camera at a child's height to demonstrate how large the elements of the world were.
The Fisher King is one my favourite films! Terry Gilliam has that ability to be serious when he needs to be and always appropriately, rather than as a convenience or just as a "moment".
Love The Fisher King. Great story and amazing performances by all the actors
I was really looking forward to this series as Time Bandits was one of my favourite movies when I was a kid, I too don't understand why suddenly the bandits have been replaced by full sized actors when the original actors worked so well because of their size. Looking at the trailer I am unfortunately underwhelmed by what I've so far seen, I read that Terry Gilliam was an executive producer on this project, whatever that means, its just a shame that he didn't direct it.
Don't understand how Waititi has remained popular. His entire shtick is "have a character(s) act out of place for the mood of a scene and it's funny" ad nauseum.
Not every film needs to be goofy with self-depreciating protagonists. The original version of this movie is a great example of that.
It's Gill-i-am not Gillim. The i sounds like an e.
If the original time bandits film had never existed, and you only saw this trailer you'd probably think of it as a pretty forgettable kids show. It's not going to be awful, it may even have its moments, but no one is going to be talking about this show in 20 years. It's a perfect example of modern tv/film, made to be disposable. Hollywood has lost the ability to make classics that stand the test of time and can be enjoyed by kids and adults.
Excellent commentary and realistic perspective.
Thank you!
It hurts. I suppose a remake was inevitable, but it is like someone trying to cover a song Roy Orbison sang. Good luck with that. I guess Big Trouble in Little China will be next.
They've been trying to get a Big Trouble remake or sequel off the ground for a while now. The last I heard, The Rock was supposed to be the lead attached. No doubt it was written as big, goofy, and dumb... Well, either that or way too gritty, serious, and self-important.
@@NeilChaseFilm Ouch. The Rock at his best is amazing, but I really can't see it. Ok, let's double down and see how the Hollywood version of Kung Fu Hustle works out. :) That movie has layers beyond layers and wild references. Even the casting is part of the wild range of references. I loved the movie so much, but I am assured that I missed out on more than I got.
The only remake of that classic I would attempt to watch is if they casted Kurt's son Wyatt to play Jack.
@@joshhubbard-yg1tv He would be even better as Snake Plissken.
yeah i'm not feeling this new version.
This looks like crap.
I loved the original Time Bandits. The humour was sofisticated and evil was multi layered and the world's seemed real and the jeopardy seemed real.
This new one looks like Pheobe from friends leads a a band of comedy relief through situational opportunities to make cheap shallow cultural jokes that aren't funny.
Haha you're not wrong!
Great reaction. Like many other remakes this looks like it has removed all of the soul of the original and just plastered it's skin over a sub-par rehashing of the same story.
Movies and other media have always pilfered the past for inspiration and many remakes / re-tellings have been made over the years, some good, most bad, but many recent examples all suffer from the "the characters are aware they're in the "______" movie. For example when she says "We're the Time Bandits...", I may be wrong but I don't think that they used that phrase in the original. Another recent example that comes to mind is the History of the World Part 2, that was so different in tone that it bore almost no resemblance to the original Mel Brooks film.
I don't understand why the decision to change the lead characters from little people to random diverse actors is being made for properties where the little people are integral part of why the movie worked in the first place (Time Bandits, Snow White, etc.). And including them in a minor supporting role as you've pointed out is even more offensive than excluding them outright IMHO. While they are almost impossible to replace, there are surely actors out there today who could try to fill the shoes of the David Rappaport's, Kenny Baker's, Malcolm Dixon's, Jack Purvis's & Billy Barty's of the world. Wouldn't a project like this be the perfect vehicle to showcase little known actors with dwarfism? As much as I like and admire Peter Dinklage, he can't be the only actor available for these type of roles.
Another thing that seems to detract from the experience is the "feeling" of projects that are shot on film versus those that re done all digital. The newer stuff is all too clean to the point the nothing looks or feels real.
I'm old enough to have seen the original in theaters and have been a huge Terry Gilliam fan since first seeing Monty Python's Flying Circus and the Holy Grail on PBS in the 70's.
There are so many quotes from the original movie that I still use today that make me chuckle just thinking about how they were originally delivered, somehow I don't see that being the case with this remake. Just my 2 cents.
Great insight! And I especially agree that remakes for the most part lost the charm of the originals, even if by default. It takes the right combination of writing, direction and acting to elevate a remake above the original (The Thing comes to mind right away) - but that takes skill and passion, which are severely lacking (or restricted) these days.
@@NeilChaseFilm I've now had the misfortune of watching the first couple of episodes and I cannot believe that anyone on the production all the way up to the top, thought that this was a good idea.
The biggest problem with it so far (and I'm guessing this won't get any better as the show goes on) is that it's 99% tell and very little show. Doesn't that break the golden rule of good story telling? Nothing like one of the main characters dumping a bunch of exposition every time there's a change of scenery.
It also suffers from one of the points of failure of a lot of re-makes or copies in that the pace and cadence of British speaking and cultural humor almost never really translates when spoken with an American accent (see American versions of Coupling, Faulty Towers, etc.).
Maybe I'm nitpicking, but another thing that bothers me it that the transitions when they time jump are nowhere near as funny since they all appear to teleport instead of falling from an opening in the sky into the ocean or into a barn. Part of the humor of the original was them all piling onto each other and straightening themselves out as they all got up, fixating uniforms, hats, etc. Taking shots at each other in the process.
I thought that the concept of the translating hat was a good idea, kinda like the Babel fish in Hitchhiker's Guide, it solves a real problem with an albeit easy plot device, but at least it make sense. In the original we're left to suspend disbelief that everyone speaks and or understands English.
The actor playing Kevin seems to be the most invested and immersed in the role and is fun to watch, even though they make him a full on kid-boss and everything he says to historical figures is immediately accepted, there's no tension or conflict and everyone just goes along without question just because...
I wanted to give it a chance, but all in all, it falls flat and I may not finish the series out of apathy.
Call me what you like, but to quote Ian Holmes' Napoleon, "Little things hitting each other. THAT's WHAT I LIKE!!"
A movie that should never have been touched. Ever...
Hard to argue with that.
THEY RUINED IT 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭never mess with a classic 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
looks like one cringe inducing moment after another.
An unnecessary interpretation of a classic. I’ll take a look at the first episode…but I’m not hopeful from the trailer
If you’re complaining about remakes you are ignorant of how Hollywood has operated for the past 100 years
There's a difference between complaining about remakes and complaining about BAD remakes.