A Few More Highlander Remake Thoughts

[ithildin]

On one of the Highlander email lists, I glanced at a few emails on the subject today. There seems to be the sentiment that if only the two sequels had gotten the big budget that the remake's getting, things would have been different. And people seem quite bitter about it. But is that really true? Can you turn a sow's ear into a silk purse? If 'The Source' had had a 55 million dollar budget, it just would have been a more expensive crap movie. In the end, it's the story that makes a movie. If Highlander could grip us with relatively low budget TV episodes, then money isn't the key, IMHO. To my mind, the most hopeful thing about the remake isn't the budget, but that the script is going to be written by people who seem to be able to tell a good story. And a good story is a good story no matter how much money is thrown at it. All the money in the world couldn't have turned 'The Source' into a good movie. Just my good for nothing opinion, of course :)

Comments

[unovis-lj.livejournal.com]

$55 million could have meant a better director, more footage shot to choose from, and fewer disasters in the endgame of editing and distribution. Unless it had some impact on the choice of script or script writer, then no, the movie would still have been pretty bad. Unless it influenced them to move away from the horror genre, then no, the movie would still have been bad. But we might have had decent lighting and more pretty source material for vids.