The Sartorialist wrote a post about Mary Tyler Moore recently and the comments have me thinking. Why do we constantly need to update icons? Why does someone need to be the new version of an older performer? Why can't those icons stand the test of time without us trying to update them for our current media as if new actors can't stand on their own merits? Are we so simple that we can't relate to newcomers without tying them to someone we're familiar with? I grew so tired of the "Debra Messing is the new Lucille Ball" comparison because no matter what Debra might do, she's not the new Lucille Ball. Lucille Ball was Lucille Ball and she's Debra Messing, moderately comedic actress who happens to dye her hair red. To be honest, she wasn't even that comedic. I find it all so demeaning to the predecessors to assume that their individuality can be co-opted by someone else 30 years later.
And for that matter, why aren't the old movies enough without the remakes - the adaptations for today? I think we all get the plot of "Sabrina" without having Harrison Ford in it. I'm pretty sure we're all into the "Poseidon" thing. Boat flips, tragedy, triumph, but no awesome theme like "The Morning After" in the sunk-before-it-swam revisiting.
Solution? Parents, show your kids the old movies. Let them see the stars and the plots for themselves. And although we'll always have Wolfgang and celebrity profile writers looking to make a connection, at least we'll know that they're all just not as good as the originals.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
As the new 'Wicker Man' bears down on us I can only nod and say how right you are.
I just dread the day that "Breakfast at Tiffany's" gets remade featuring Jennifer Love Hewitt due to a very weak resemblance. If only her career had ended with Kids Incorporated like Martika's!
David, T-Roy, you're both right. Painfully so.
Post a Comment