12 Monkeys is being remade...

[FerryFor50]

Into a TV movie!

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi819702809/?ref_=tt_ov_vi

ARRRGGHHH

Awful, awful... problems I see with this already:

1) It's a TV movie
2) It's not being directed by Terry Gilliam
3) They don't have Jeffrey Goines
4) They cast the guy who played Pyro in the X-Men movies

Talk about movies that did not need to be remade, much less as a TV movie.

[cspan37421]

Look on the bright side ... at least it's not the 12 Monkeys Holiday Special.

[weezie]

Look on the bright side ... at least it's not the 12 Monkeys Holiday Special.

Hahahaha!!!:D
A musical, I'm assuming.

[Blue in the Face]

I think it will be a series, not a tv movie.

[FerryFor50]

I think it will be a series, not a tv movie.

IMDB says movie. Unless the movie is the pilot.

[JasonEvans]

IMDB says movie. Unless the movie is the pilot.

It is going to be a 13-episode TV series on the SyFy channel, which means the budget for special effects and sets won't be all that big. I believe SyFy originally envisioned it as a 90-minute made-for-TV movie, but then moved it to be a full on TV series. One problem is that as a TV series, there is no incentive to resolve the central story like there is in a movie. As a result, it could become very tiresome and anti-climactic.

Still, the trailer looks kinda cool (though some of the writing is awful!) and I am a big fan of Zeljko Ivanek.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZNcVYqnCFw

One last point-- the movie is far from perfect. To me, it is not some sacrosanct sci-fi icon that should not be touched. I actually found Gilliam's trippy style off-putting at times (though one has to expect that from one of his films, they are all like that) and some of the Brad Pitt stuff was a little too over the top. It is a wonderful story though.

Anyone want to talk about the ending? The scientist from the future (Jones is her name) sits down on the plane next to the scientist bad guy, Peters (played by a pony-tailed David Morse). He asks what she does and she says shes in "insurance." I have heard many different interpretations of this scene.

1) Is she actually an insurance person, meaning that the future scientists aren't really scientists and don't really know what they are doing? -- I disagree with this interpretation. Jones is the same age in the scene as she is in the future. This is clearly a time-traveling Jones coming back to the past for some purpose.

2) Is she there to "insure" that the virus does not spread? Sorta a back-up plan to Bruce Willis (who fails to stop Peters and is gunned down at the airport). -- I mostly disagree with this one as well. Recall that Peters uncaps the vial containing the airborne virus at a security checkpoint before boarding the plane. Any real chance to completely stop the virus goes out the window at that moment. Still, I suppose that if Bruce Willis had shot Peters or if Jones kills him on the plane, the virus could be much better contained as Peters was about to travel all over the world with the virus.

3) Is she there to "insure" that the virus does spread? -- This is absolutely my interpretation of the final scene. Jones wants the virus to spread because she likes a future world where she is a powerful person. But, she also wants to get a sample of the virus so she can design a cure to it (allowing mankind to come out from underground and live on the surface again). The mission was never to have Bruce Willis stop the virus, it was just for him to identify where it came from so Jones could "insure" the future. Changing the past was never part of her (or the other future scientists) plan.

https://thethoughtexperiment.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/074monkeys.jpg

-Jason "really good movie, been fun thinking about it again" Evans

[FerryFor50]

It is going to be a 13-episode TV series on the SyFy channel, which means the budget for special effects and sets won't be all that big. I believe SyFy originally envisioned it as a 90-minute made-for-TV movie, but then moved it to be a full on TV series. One problem is that as a TV series, there is no incentive to resolve the central story like there is in a movie. As a result, it could become very tiresome and anti-climactic.

Still, the trailer looks kinda cool (though some of the writing is awful!) and I am a big fan of Zeljko Ivanek.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZNcVYqnCFw

One last point-- the movie is far from perfect. To me, it is not some sacrosanct sci-fi icon that should not be touched. I actually found Gilliam's trippy style off-putting at times (though one has to expect that from one of his films, they are all like that) and some of the Brad Pitt stuff was a little too over the top. It is a wonderful story though.

Anyone want to talk about the ending? The scientist from the future (Jones is her name) sits down on the plane next to the scientist bad guy, Peters (played by a pony-tailed David Morse). He asks what she does and she says shes in "insurance." I have heard many different interpretations of this scene.

1) Is she actually an insurance person, meaning that the future scientists aren't really scientists and don't really know what they are doing? -- I disagree with this interpretation. Jones is the same age in the scene as she is in the future. This is clearly a time-traveling Jones coming back to the past for some purpose.

2) Is she there to "insure" that the virus does not spread? Sorta a back-up plan to Bruce Willis (who fails to stop Peters and is gunned down at the airport). -- I mostly disagree with this one as well. Recall that Peters uncaps the vial containing the airborne virus at a security checkpoint before boarding the plane. Any real chance to completely stop the virus goes out the window at that moment. Still, I suppose that if Bruce Willis had shot Peters or if Jones kills him on the plane, the virus could be much better contained as Peters was about to travel all over the world with the virus.

3) Is she there to "insure" that the virus does spread? -- This is absolutely my interpretation of the final scene. Jones wants the virus to spread because she likes a future world where she is a powerful person. But, she also wants to get a sample of the virus so she can design a cure to it (allowing mankind to come out from underground and live on the surface again). The mission was never to have Bruce Willis stop the virus, it was just for him to identify where it came from so Jones could "insure" the future. Changing the past was never part of her (or the other future scientists) plan.

https://thethoughtexperiment.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/074monkeys.jpg

-Jason "really good movie, been fun thinking about it again" Evans

I didn't think the trailer made it look fun... I thought it made it look pretty contrived. But then again, I am a HUGE 12 Monkeys fan. I loved Gilliam's "trippy" style, and in fact, preferred this one over his more well-regarded "Brazil (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)." The organ grinder soundtrack, the obtuse camera angles, the circular editing... you could watch it on a loop and it would "fit" each time. Recall the Einstein quote:

4265

I *do* feel like it's a sci-fi icon that should not be touched, at least not as a TV series on ScyFy. I'd rather see it get a proper re-make by a director wearing their big boy pants. I'm not one of those "never remake ANY movie" guys. I think some movies need to be re-made. I was fine with Total Recall, Robocop, etc getting re-made, even if the remakes ended up being not-so-good. You re-make movies that weren't that great but had good storylines and potential. You don't remake movies that practically need nothing to improve them.

The ending analysis, I had not heard before... it's interesting and makes me want to go re-watch it again, which, by the way, you should do if you have not seen it in a while. It holds up VERY well. (which is even more reason why they should not re-make it)

[cspan37421]

Anyone want to talk about the ending? The scientist from the future (Jones is her name) sits down on the plane next to the scientist bad guy, Peters (played by a pony-tailed David Morse). He asks what she does and she says shes in "insurance." I have heard many different interpretations of this scene.

1) Is she actually an insurance person, meaning that the future scientists aren't really scientists and don't really know what they are doing? -- I disagree with this interpretation. Jones is the same age in the scene as she is in the future. This is clearly a time-traveling Jones coming back to the past for some purpose.

2) Is she there to "insure" that the virus does not spread? Sorta a back-up plan to Bruce Willis (who fails to stop Peters and is gunned down at the airport). -- I mostly disagree with this one as well. Recall that Peters uncaps the vial containing the airborne virus at a security checkpoint before boarding the plane. Any real chance to completely stop the virus goes out the window at that moment. Still, I suppose that if Bruce Willis had shot Peters or if Jones kills him on the plane, the virus could be much better contained as Peters was about to travel all over the world with the virus.

3) Is she there to "insure" that the virus does spread? -- This is absolutely my interpretation of the final scene. Jones wants the virus to spread because she likes a future world where she is a powerful person. But, she also wants to get a sample of the virus so she can design a cure to it (allowing mankind to come out from underground and live on the surface again). The mission was never to have Bruce Willis stop the virus, it was just for him to identify where it came from so Jones could "insure" the future. Changing the past was never part of her (or the other future scientists) plan.



4) Clearly, she is an actuary and, with knowledge of the effects of the virus, she is in a position to arbitrage mortality experience and thus make billions of dollars going long annuity mortality and shorting life insurance mortality.

The actuarial angle had to be downplayed lest there be a Who-concert-style crush of moviegoers at theaters across the nation, desperate to vicariously experience the country's #1-rated profession.

[El_Diablo]

12 Monkeys is itself a remake of La Jetée (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056119/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl).

[brevity]

12 Monkeys is itself a remake of La Jetée (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056119/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl).

And one of three movies in which Bruce Willis plays a character who shares a point in time with a younger version of himself.

[FerryFor50]

12 Monkeys is itself a remake of La Jetée (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056119/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl).

Correct.

But I think La Jetée was in dire need of a remake. It had been over 30 years. :)

[Olympic Fan]

12 Monkeys is itself a remake of La Jetée (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056119/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl).

Yes ... but Le Jetee is not a feature film. It was a 28 minute experiment by French new wave director Chris Maker. It's mostly a series of still photographs, done in back and white without stars.

Gilliam does take the basis of the 12 Monkeys story from Maker's film.

PS I am also a huge Terry Gilliam fan, although I do think Brazil is his masterpiece.

[CameronBornAndBred]

It is going to be a 13-episode TV series on the SyFy channel, which means the budget for special effects and sets won't be all that big.

Maybe, maybe not. SyFy of course is known for some gawdawful effects in gawdawful movies, but given a series they can do very well. The Stargate series had some great stuff. (I don't know how much SyFy was involved in the actual production of those, however.) One of my favorited series, Eureka, also had great effects. Unfortunately, that was of the reasons that led it's finale; they could not sustain the budget needed to keep the show running with the effects that they used. Since 12 Monkeys is only scheduled for 13 episodes, I could see them justifying doing it right.

[bjornolf]

Maybe, maybe not. SyFy of course is known for some gawdawful effects in gawdawful movies, but given a series they can do very well. The Stargate series had some great stuff. (I don't know how much SyFy was involved in the actual production of those, however.) One of my favorited series, Eureka, also had great effects. Unfortunately, that was of the reasons that led it's finale; they could not sustain the budget needed to keep the show running with the effects that they used. Since 12 Monkeys is only scheduled for 13 episodes, I could see them justifying doing it right.

I agree about loving Eureka. Did SyFy do Haven as well? I like that one a lot.