That's why I figure they're planning it as a franchise. That way, the multiple movies together would form an anthology series of sorts. Didn't they already try that with a couple of Tales From the Crypt movies some years back?
The Twilight Zone being rebooted by Bryan Singer and CBS
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
^I'm not sure. Didn't the Creepshow movies feature several stories?
Seconded! Or thirded as the case may be.
I doubt it, because a new Twilight Zone series would still be cheaper to do than a Trek series, especially if most of the stories are set on present day Earth and don't require a lot of VFX. They can save a ton of money by reusing sets from existing CBS shows too.
^I think TZ wll appeal to people who wouldn't necessarily watch a space opera. My dad loathes most sci-fi but he would watch things like TZ or Outer Limits.
The 80's version was my favorite.
There have been quite a few anthology movies over the years, including those. I'm talking about something different, a series of full, self-contained movies that are released under a blanket title. Something where each individual movie tells only one story, but collectively they're packaged as an anthology series under a blanket supertitle. The two Tales From the Crypt films Demon Knight and Bordello of Blood (and the third DTV one Ritual) were like that, but I think there must have been others. Maybe the various National Lampoon's-branded movies would qualify.
I'm not against remakes, but this is one where I don't even know why they bother trying.
The original had SO many great things going for it-- Rod Serling's brilliant writing, the stark and inherently creepy black and white imagery, all those great character actors of the 60s who were compelling as hell to watch, the fact most of those stories hadn't been told before, etc-- that there's no way a remake could even come close.
Unless they got, like, Vince Gilligan to run it or something, who would be allowed to be as dark and edgy as he wanted. But I doubt that would ever happen.
The original had SO many great things going for it-- Rod Serling's brilliant writing, the stark and inherently creepy black and white imagery, all those great character actors of the 60s who were compelling as hell to watch, the fact most of those stories hadn't been told before, etc-- that there's no way a remake could even come close.
Unless they got, like, Vince Gilligan to run it or something, who would be allowed to be as dark and edgy as he wanted. But I doubt that would ever happen.
Every so often, someone wants to bring anthologies back. But anthologies are a tough sell these days, so it makes sense to go with an established, successful name. And the most successful SF/fantasy anthologies, the ones that are best remembered today, were The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits, with the former tending more toward fantasy and the latter more toward SF. So those are the names it's natural to gravitate toward.
Unfortunately, it's also completely natural to take that concept and brutally rape it repeatedly with each remake.
Leave it the hell alone.
I'm sure Bill Shakes with fear of his Peers laughing at him over West Side Story or Tromeo and Julie Ate or Rome0 and Julie8 or Zeffireli's Whiting/Hussey 1967 Romeo and Juliet
It's in very poor taste to use something as horrible and traumatizing as rape as a metaphor for something as fundamentally harmless as reinterpreting a work of fiction in an unsatisfying way. We really need to wipe out that idiom.
And really, what concept? It's an anthology! It's a different concept every week! What is there for a purist to get up in arms about? There are no lead characters to be reinterpreted, no continuity to be rewritten. It's just a format, a genre, a title, and a theme tune. How do you "leave alone" an entire format or an entire genre? Sure, you could try doing a fantasy/SF anthology under a different name, but when it's been tried in recent years, it's always flopped quickly. (Anyone remember Welcome to Paradox or Masters of Science Fiction?) Any fantasy anthology is going to be likened to TZ anyway, so why not actually make it TZ? If it works, if the name recognition helps a worthwhile anthology series (since one of them is bound to be worthwhile one of these days, and Bryan Singer's as likely to make it work as anyone) get a better chance of success, then I say go for it!
And really, what concept? It's an anthology! It's a different concept every week! What is there for a purist to get up in arms about? There are no lead characters to be reinterpreted, no continuity to be rewritten. It's just a format, a genre, a title, and a theme tune. How do you "leave alone" an entire format or an entire genre? Sure, you could try doing a fantasy/SF anthology under a different name, but when it's been tried in recent years, it's always flopped quickly. (Anyone remember Welcome to Paradox or Masters of Science Fiction?) Any fantasy anthology is going to be likened to TZ anyway, so why not actually make it TZ? If it works, if the name recognition helps a worthwhile anthology series (since one of them is bound to be worthwhile one of these days, and Bryan Singer's as likely to make it work as anyone) get a better chance of success, then I say go for it!
Neat. I look forward to seeing what they do with it. I can't see it being a ratings successful 22 episode show but a summer show might work.
This pretty much sums up my feelings.
A host with a strong presence is also very necessary. I also think the Michael Emerson suggestion is inspired. Someone with his level of gravitas is needed.
That is one of the biggest things that makes The Twilight Zone what it is. If they get rid of the host, they might as well just use a whole new title.
The 80's version ditched the host in favor of a voice over. But they also showed Rod Serling in the opening so they probably did not want to try and fill his shoes.
The thing is that the 80's version was actually really well received and had a number of neat ideas.
On some level the revamped Outer Limits largely mined the same well as TZ. The original Outer Limits was more about creature features and weird Monsters/aliens where as TZ had the twist endings. Revamped OL borrowed alot of its ideas from TZ and took them to the next level. That the Outer Limits took the same route and ended up on TV for so long probably made it harder or the 3rd TZ to find its place.
Okay. They usually murder the concept. Is that better?
Odd question for you to ask, since you already know the answer. You're already on record as saying you didn't feel that the 80s network revival captured the original TZ vibe. As you've also mentioned, there have been many anthologies over the years-- Twilight Zone, Outer Limits, Thriller, Tales From The Darkside, Tales From The Crypt, even Serling's own Night Gallery, to name a few-- and they've all had their own themes and aesthetics. And, while there are certainly some areas of overlap, a story or approach that's appropriate for one would generally not be appropriate for the other. The Crypt-Keeper rocks, but should not be considered as a substitute for Rod Serling.
Similar threads
