Land of the Lost... Indeed

I have railed a number of times on this blog about the penchant for Hollywood to remake things and completely ignore the original concept which made whatever it was worth thinking about remaking in the first place.

When I first saw that Land of the Lost was being remade, I thought it might make for a decent franchise. And then the rumors and hires started-- it became a Will Ferrell family comedy. And then I started seeing the first promos and previews and my fears were realized; this movie was so far away from the original concept of Land of the Lost as it could be and still call itself that.

Just in case my memory for the original was faulty, Sci-Fi had a marathon of ALL of the episodes. I caught a number of them; yep, as I remembered, the original was a "dramatic" children's story about a family unit being lost in a land where dinosaurs threatened them, Sleastaks wanted to kill them and take over, and strange obelisks could manipulate time, space, and the weather. Although there was humor in it, it was played straight for the most part and there was always tension.

The preliminary results are in and the Will Ferrell movie made about 19.5 million in its opening weekend. About 10-20 million off what the studio anticipated and well below what Will Ferrell's movies usually do.

And I suspect I know why: had they named this something else and not had Sleastaks in it, I bet it would have done okay. Or, if they had named it Land of the Lost and kept it true to the essence of the original (a family in peril, trying to survive) it would have done okay. But history keeps proving that if Hollywood makes comedies out of what were 70s dramas and action TV shows, the BO for each gets progressively worse.

I know that Hollywood thinks the average movie-goer is stupid. And sometimes I agree. However, you can't keep fooling them in the same way and expect to succeed long term. The first Charlies Angel movie did well because it was a new take on the light comedy/drama of the original. The second didn't do as well because it relied too much on kitsch and lost the fine balance. Dukes of Hazzard and Starskey and Hutch didn't even pretend to be like the original TV shows. And each did progressively worse.

The other thing that Hollywood forgets is that the audience likes sequels, prequels, and remakes... to a point. This summer may be horrible due to the large number of remakes that, frankly, few people care about. And I'll I'm seeing and reading is about the movies and shows being options for future remakes and reimaginings. Hollywood is forgetting that you need some originality to spice things up and keep the audience coming back.

I am absolutely tickled pink that LotL seems to have failed miserably and, if it succeeds at the 50%+ drop I expect next week, may not break $60 million. This sends a clear sign to Hollywood (again, along with Terminator: Salvation) that sequels, remakes, and other rehashes need to be carefully thought out and considered before investing in. Stay true to the original concept. If you alienate the core audience, you will suffer and die a painful BO death.

Thank god for Up! Here's original, quality storytelling that is making money hand-over-fist. Maybe someone in Hollywood will realize that originality is a good thing?