I thought that, while Greystoke and Disney’s Tarzan took liberties with the original stories (a lot of them, in Disney’s case) both were good movies in their own right. Jackson’s King Kong was an affectionate homage with a terrifically-realized Kong - the film would have been truly great if Jackson had been able to restrain himself a little. (Just how many hours did those pilots spend intermittently machine-gunning the ape before he finally fell off the building? Oh, and in case Jackson cares, I would have cast Bruce Willis in place of Jack Black.)

It is possible that the Creature film will still be worthwhile. Like all good cryptozoologists, we’ll wait for the evidence.

Kaor, y’all.

Bad News: ‘John Carter of Mars’ is currently planned to be made into a movie. I think I read somewhere the planned release is 2011 or something.

Good News: It’s made by the good people of Pixar, the last bastion of good film-making in major motion pictures. And Brad Bird (’The Incredibles’, ‘Iron Giant’, ‘Rattatouille’) was said to be the one to direct it. So I’m hopeful about that one

But I have a theory that imagination and innovation will soon return to hollywood, after students and great pioneers of the field start to flood these corporate money bags stagnant cesspool of awful films there will be justice.

I am saddened that times are so very bleak, I’ll admit i’m a romanticist of the past and it pains me that the present is so dull and unimaginative.

Remember the remake of Planet of the Apes, where the different ape species were treated as if they were merely separate races (or maybe just different hair coloring preferences)? And how about that latest Superman film, where Supes becomes an absent father? Or ANY Tarzan movie?

Thank God they’re still leaving John Carter of Mars alone!

Sorry about that, it just irks me to see stupidity and ego taking the place of real creativity. But really, some of these characters have been popular for nearly a hundred years and the original stories are still compelling. Why can’t Hollywood simply film the various adventurers as they were originally written and not “re-imagine” them or film their own “interpretations,” which are always far less enjoyable?

I always liked the Creature. I will be sorry to see him (it?) crippled and maimed as I fear is likely. It’s said that Margaret Mitchell, who wrote Gone With The Wind said when she signed away her movie rights to the book that she hoped by the time Hollywood was through with her book, that the North would still have won the Civil War. I guess such meddling is just tradition by now. Pity.

I hope the remake won’t go wild with preachy eco-lessons and digital effects. That what seems to be happening with the remake of “The Day the Earth Stood Still.” The original movie worked so well because it was effectively a two-character drama, with effects that were cool for their day but were never allowed to overwhelm the story.

Isn’t there a fresh thought in Hollywood anymore? Say some work akin to Arthur Ross’s perhaps? His invention was compelling, good story telling, and not a contrived hackneyed rehash of a worn out theme.

I was excited about the re-make until I got to the end of the story. You know, maybe the sci-fi channel will make that flick and add it to their list of “B” creature features.