The 1980s were a magical time for entertainment. Time and time again, we see shows pop up on TV telling us "Hey! Wasn't that one thing awesome?!” Well, it seems that most movie executives watch those shows as well and think that instead of coming up with a creative idea, why not make a sequel to a movie that is loved by many and will ruin the original. We have seen this done with so many of our favorite movies of the '80s … Wall Street, Tron and Indiana Jones, to name a few. This needs to stop! Here are some franchises that I feel should stay in the Reagan years:
Ferris Bueller's Day Off
I can just see some hotshot movie exec pitching the idea that the movie could show #saveferris on Twitter as a hilarious idea for an update on this classic movie. However, it wouldn't be that funny … at all. Nevertheless, if Hollywood had its way it would see a brand new Ferris Bueller story about an adult Ferris taking a day off. But there is something about the idea of an adult Ferris needing a day off that doesn't sit well with me. Ferris needs a villain to avoid and escape from for a story to have the fun tension of the original. Ed Rooney always worked as the perfect villain for Ferris because a high school principal is a force that Ferris cannot avoid. In the working world, I would imagine Ferris at a job conning his way up the corporate ladder so that by the age of 50 he wouldn't have anyone above him to escape from, no one to catch him in the act of not working. A day in life of Ferris Bueller today would be very boring because it would be Ferris running around with a bunch of money and no dramatic tension. Ferris belongs forever in our minds a teenager.
Don't let them add a hashtag to this shirt:
Another movie character we don't really need to see later on in his life is Maverick. Top Gun tells a full story in one movie and at the end, I don't think anyone was left thinking about the further adventures of a man who writes checks his body can't cash. And what would his next story be? That Maverick can't sit at a desk anymore? That he is left a teacher to give out his knowledge of reckless flying and volleyball skills to a new group of knuckleheads, but deep inside he really wants to be up in the air? That idea has already been done … that was made in the '80s … “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan”. Sure, there was no volleyball or Iceman, but there was a force to bring James T. Kirk out of his teaching position. What would bring Maverick back? Someone captured Charlie and it is up to some Air Force dog fighting to save the day? Doubtful. So let's leave “Top Gun” alone and not imagine current Tom Cruise and Kelly McGillis making-out.
The Defense Department regrets to inform you that this sequel idea is stupid:
Part of me (a very small part of me) kind of wants to see a sequel to this, but the smart part of me knows that it would be terrible. There is no way this could be done that would do justice to the original. It could go one of two ways, and both would be a hard sell to make. One way is that it becomes a "get the gang back together" movie and it would be up to Mikey to convince Mouth, Data and Chunk to go on another adventure to save their beloved neighborhood in Astoria. On the other hand, it could be something far worse in that it becomes a movie about the kids of the Goonies banding together for an adventure of their own. Either way we lose. Because The Goonies (and The Monster Squad, a far greater but similar movie) is a movie about kids for kids which could not exist in our current state of perpetual political correctness. Mouth couldn't have said those terrible things to Rosalita in Spanish, Chunk couldn't have been threatened with torture by the Fratellis, and I'm not sure which way they'd go with for Data traps … booty or booby. So let's hope neither the children or the return of the original Goonies ever happens. To paraphrase Cyndi Lauper, the classic Goonies 'r' good enough.
Live by these words:
There has been a ton of rumors about the potential of a Ghostbusters 3 that have traveled the Internet, but lucky for us Bill Murray exists and seems to have put a stop to it. All I can do is be extremely happy that Bill has made that choice, because Ghostbusters is something that is near and dear to my heart, much like Indiana Jones was before they went and ruined it with Shia Lebouf. Doctor Henry Jones Jr. is a character I used to pretend to be about 30% of my time as a child and I felt like he could do no wrong, but then came a kingdom full of *spoiler* alien glowing skulls. In that film, my favorite archeologist was no longer as cool as I remembered him. This is why I don't want there to be a Ghostbusters 3; because 40% of my childhood I was Doctor Peter Venkman (which leaves 20% pretending to be Michaelangelo and 10% as various other characters). These characters were some of the best in film because they were the everyman; they were like us but with proton packs. Now, could a movie that mixes our favorite boys in brown with Grumpy Old Men be good? Maybe … but if Bill Murray says "NO" to anything I listen. So let's leave these scientists in the 80s and live out old Ghostbusters fantasies through Zombieland.
Keep it classy, keep it classic:
Tom Lokhorst is a purveyor of popular culture and a movie fanatic. He'll literally watch anything Bill Murray has ever done ... except a third Ghostbusters movie. That would just be a travesty.