If there ever was a movie designed to satisfy the algorithm, this might be it. Reboot a beloved deep cut of a campy 80's property, attach a widely beloved A-list actor, manufacture a viral social media stunt (albeit successfully - remember the week that was the inescapability of Gyllenhaal's action figure physique crashing a real UFC event?), target a sizable cross-demo of one of the world's fastest growing sports by casting its most polarizing star as the film's villain, hire a well-respected veteran director of action, generate (?) a controversy between that director and studio, and release it for "free" on one of the world's most visited websites.
The most disturbing part of all this is that it actually worked, at least on me. Despite this being one of the worst movies I've seen in years, I had it marked on my calendar, clicked "play", and am now spending my Sunday morning writing this comment, feeding the algorithm further.
Classifying a movie or any creative product as "successful" is an arguably futile exercise, but the way I determine if a film, song, book etc. was effective or not is in its ability to communicate reverence, faith, love or some sort of affection from the creators behind it. If I can sense that the creators believed in the idea or story, they are presenting - I can respect it, whether I enjoyed the experience of experiencing it or not. That's not the case here, every frame is this movie is void of any love for the "story". A film's success is no longer determined in its ability to move its audience, it's measured in clicks.
I grew up watching the original on cable. It was always a blast. Upon seeing the trailer for this one I said “I didn’t think I wanted a Road House remake, but if I did this would be it.” I think Gyllenhaal is usually great and gives it his all. But after watching this, I was so disappointed, this lacked so much of the fun of the original. While the fights were more brutal, they lacked excitement. Overall the whole thing just felt empty and soulless, even the attempts at character building just didn’t really work. I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece but a fun romp with cool fights and this did not deliver.
The original is a so-bad-it-is-fun sort of film. I grew up a child of the 80s, but even with rose-tinted glasses I know how ludicrous it is. And yes, Sam Elliott was the coolest!
This is one is just bad. The seriousness undermines how silly the plot really is. It's still just lipstick on a pig. It actually took me and my wife two nights to watch it, and there is no way we will watch it again. It is missing the, dare I say, charm of the first.
I don't think the 80s version could be called a cult classic. The campiness is high, but not quite high enough to throw it in that bucket. So why green light this? Remaking a bad-but-good film as a only-bad film is never a smart move. And again, I have to ask in this age of streaming and strategies, was this really supposed to attract people to get a Prime sub? If so, this is not the right way to go about it.
I don’t know how old you are but my husband (then boyfriend) saw this for the first time in the theater… and when he ripped out the guy’s throat, which NO ONE saw coming it was equal parts awesome and disgusting… but somehow it worked! Patrick Swayze was INCREDIBLY HOT and had SO MUCH charisma I could have watched him reading the phone book and loved it! Sam Elliot was there to I next the COOL FACTOR, which he’s done for a lot of movies, and it works every time. I think Swayze may have chose this film, he was a HUGE star then, to shake off the teeny bopper heart throb image he got from Dirty Dancing; which became a massive hit and is definitely a cult classic! My husband said the reboot started off slow but ended on a high note! I can’t bring myself to watch it! For me Road House without Swayze is like The Godfather without Pacino… I’ll take a pass!
"Side note: we never learn what Tilghman’s whole deal is, which is one of several subplots that never gets resolved"
Sorry, can't believe I again have to defend the movie but that is not a subplot. By any definition. It's a curious character detail you can fill with anything you want, but it literally doesn't matter.
Great review of Road House from your Newsletter! Very much enjoyed reading it.
Road House was from my generation - it was a super weird time for films - for everything I suppose. But Road House and even Next of Kin were seriously odd I distinctly remember. There seem to be more wtf films from the 1980s than any other decade. While I now find most of them cringeworthy I like that there was a period like this in film history - maybe it's a reaction to the seriousness and grit of 70's films - high gloss and vapid.
If there ever was a movie designed to satisfy the algorithm, this might be it. Reboot a beloved deep cut of a campy 80's property, attach a widely beloved A-list actor, manufacture a viral social media stunt (albeit successfully - remember the week that was the inescapability of Gyllenhaal's action figure physique crashing a real UFC event?), target a sizable cross-demo of one of the world's fastest growing sports by casting its most polarizing star as the film's villain, hire a well-respected veteran director of action, generate (?) a controversy between that director and studio, and release it for "free" on one of the world's most visited websites.
The most disturbing part of all this is that it actually worked, at least on me. Despite this being one of the worst movies I've seen in years, I had it marked on my calendar, clicked "play", and am now spending my Sunday morning writing this comment, feeding the algorithm further.
Classifying a movie or any creative product as "successful" is an arguably futile exercise, but the way I determine if a film, song, book etc. was effective or not is in its ability to communicate reverence, faith, love or some sort of affection from the creators behind it. If I can sense that the creators believed in the idea or story, they are presenting - I can respect it, whether I enjoyed the experience of experiencing it or not. That's not the case here, every frame is this movie is void of any love for the "story". A film's success is no longer determined in its ability to move its audience, it's measured in clicks.
I grew up watching the original on cable. It was always a blast. Upon seeing the trailer for this one I said “I didn’t think I wanted a Road House remake, but if I did this would be it.” I think Gyllenhaal is usually great and gives it his all. But after watching this, I was so disappointed, this lacked so much of the fun of the original. While the fights were more brutal, they lacked excitement. Overall the whole thing just felt empty and soulless, even the attempts at character building just didn’t really work. I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece but a fun romp with cool fights and this did not deliver.
The original is a so-bad-it-is-fun sort of film. I grew up a child of the 80s, but even with rose-tinted glasses I know how ludicrous it is. And yes, Sam Elliott was the coolest!
This is one is just bad. The seriousness undermines how silly the plot really is. It's still just lipstick on a pig. It actually took me and my wife two nights to watch it, and there is no way we will watch it again. It is missing the, dare I say, charm of the first.
I don't think the 80s version could be called a cult classic. The campiness is high, but not quite high enough to throw it in that bucket. So why green light this? Remaking a bad-but-good film as a only-bad film is never a smart move. And again, I have to ask in this age of streaming and strategies, was this really supposed to attract people to get a Prime sub? If so, this is not the right way to go about it.
I don’t know how old you are but my husband (then boyfriend) saw this for the first time in the theater… and when he ripped out the guy’s throat, which NO ONE saw coming it was equal parts awesome and disgusting… but somehow it worked! Patrick Swayze was INCREDIBLY HOT and had SO MUCH charisma I could have watched him reading the phone book and loved it! Sam Elliot was there to I next the COOL FACTOR, which he’s done for a lot of movies, and it works every time. I think Swayze may have chose this film, he was a HUGE star then, to shake off the teeny bopper heart throb image he got from Dirty Dancing; which became a massive hit and is definitely a cult classic! My husband said the reboot started off slow but ended on a high note! I can’t bring myself to watch it! For me Road House without Swayze is like The Godfather without Pacino… I’ll take a pass!
"Side note: we never learn what Tilghman’s whole deal is, which is one of several subplots that never gets resolved"
Sorry, can't believe I again have to defend the movie but that is not a subplot. By any definition. It's a curious character detail you can fill with anything you want, but it literally doesn't matter.
Great review of Road House from your Newsletter! Very much enjoyed reading it.
Road House was from my generation - it was a super weird time for films - for everything I suppose. But Road House and even Next of Kin were seriously odd I distinctly remember. There seem to be more wtf films from the 1980s than any other decade. While I now find most of them cringeworthy I like that there was a period like this in film history - maybe it's a reaction to the seriousness and grit of 70's films - high gloss and vapid.