Unofficial Tex Murphy

On one hand I'll have to agree that it took a lot of work and effort to get to the finished product back then. That said, the caveman that takes two sticks to light fire is still far less impressive than the atom bomb.

Or in other words, sure they tried harder to get any visual effects at all, but it still looks like crap when modern cinema rolls over it. Hell, I could go out to Wal-Mart, buy a digital camera, and I'm already ahead of the game.

And as for turning around to say, "How the hell did they do that?" Another person can than say, "Give me have the budget of the original and I'm sure I can do that better."

As for the content...well, that's why I looked at Steven for directing. The reasoning behind that would be his work on the film, Solaris.

Sin City nailed it, it felt like a comic book. Whilst you can argue "Photoshop" or "After Effects" it still felt like you were watching a moving comic book, same with 300. I think it just proves that graphic novels make better movies than Books and Video Games.

Metropolis, I'll agree with Cub all the way.

I have no objection if people want to remake ANY movie. What gets me hot under the collar is the poor job many movie studios do when making a remake.

I loved the original KK and I thought PJ did an excellent job with the remake.

I loved the original War of the Worlds and I thought the remake was very good (not as good as the original, but 3 stars in my book).

I loved the original Wizard of Oz and I thoroughly enjoyed The Wiz (not near as good but a great musical nonetheless; the soundtrack is one of my favs).

Metropolis? Sure, why not a remake. However, if a remake is going to be made, for goodness sakes get a great director, a worthwhile script and several top name actors. Otherwise, forget it! To me, I think Peter Jackson would make sure the movie would succeed at the box office.