Warning: This is an opinion piece because CHUD.com is built on opinions.
There’s nothing wrong with seeing an opportunity and taking it. The Mystery Science Theater crew saw public domain films as a way to do their thing, and a lot of books and movies and spoofs have been built on existing properties that were either freely available or worth the effort based on cursory name recognition. With that said, I loathe Pride and Prejudice with Zombies. Great business decision, and it’s led to other similar projects but the act of adding zombies or vampires to anything over the past half decade has been maddening and true examples of both a complete lack of respect for the genre and massive self-promotion on the backs of established foundations. The follow-up by that book’s author, Seth Grahame-Smith is Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and it furthers the cutesy blending of classical literature and overused modern horror staples.
I hate these things blindly based on what they represent but judging from the Amazon comments they’re well-written books. It only makes me sadder at the misuse of skill in favor of smashing two existing things together. It’s a shortcut and it works. Just like remaking television shows, cover songs, and in avoiding any sort of brand new intellectual property. Products like these represent something that is akin to graverobbing and it lures readers away from the stuff more deserving of their time.
This is good business and executed in a way that somehow seems cool and fresh even though to my mind it has less creative scruples than an ‘Weird Al’ song or one of the hundreds of parody books in the humor sections of bookstores across this world.
And now apparently, the Lincoln book is part of a bidding war in Hollywood. A big one. One that involves major studio players, Tim Burton, and Timur Bekmambetov. This all comes courtesy of Deadline’s Nikki Finke. Her article goes on to display the lengths in which the studios are going to in order to secure this terrifyingly original concept. Read it. It can either be viewed as a sad state of affairs, high comedy, or that I’m a bitter and grumpy person who is dead wrong in his take on the matter.
Wait…
Actually, since I find Tim Burton to have dissolved into a one-note hack and felt Timur Bekmambetov’s Wanted and ‘Watch’ films to be visually arresting but vacant maybe I should just be thrilled that all of these things that I find overblown are falling into a project together to keep them from the really choice stuff out there.
Yeah. Good on you, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter!
9 comments
So by your reasoning, Nick, Shakespeare took shortcuts and was inferior to Al Yankovic because he took pre-existing concepts (classical romances, mythologies, royal histories, nonfiction, supernatural tales) and combined them into single, unified pieces. This reasoning seems suspect to me. If the writers in question are bad writers, that's one thing, but their desire to use their talents in a genre that interests them isn't some sort of cop-out. I'd defend your interest in the horror genre against someone who called it a lesser art form (and there are many of these people), so it's disheartening to see you summarily dismissing these artists because they've chosen to work in a genre you have no taste for.
I'm just Nick is using his clout to produce an ORIGINAL movie and NOT a remake… Oh, wait…
I have to disagree with you, Nick. I just don't think there's a wrong way to be artistically creative. I haven't read those books so I can't speak to their quality, but I don't see anything wrong with their existence. And to compare that to grave robbing means your priorities are skewed to say the least. Grave robbing is morally wrong, a mash up of an old text with new additions (or whatever these books are) is nothing but that, and in no way does it compromise the integrity of the original text, in the same way that a remake will never change the original movie, or an adaptation will never change the original material.
"I hate these things blindly based on what they represent". What exactly do they represent? Genre blending? Not exactly a trend, nor in itself evil. I've never read these books, and they just look silly to me, but your opinion on this is just lazy and boring, Nick.
I guess not everything can be Grizzly Park…
I borrowed the audio book of P&P&Z from a friend after they raved about it. I was won over, despite similar misgivings. It could have been the chick reading it in the Jane Austen tight-corset style that got it over the line, but it kind of works in a weird historical/"Age of Empire" way. The zombie use is quite restrained, it's all the ninja stuff that's wildly over the top when it breaks out. I think there was a foreword or afterword that described the process of choosing the elements. The publishers had a mash-up list that the author was allowed to choose from (almost like a writing assignment), then it he went off and started researching everything. It does have the on-shelf appearance of the type of book you buy as a novelty gift during the holidays – one that nobody was seriously meant to read. But he seems to have actually taken the task seriously. Eventually he'll be well known enough to sell his own original novels off the reputation from the mash-up books.
Fuck Romero for stealing from Richard Mattheson. Fuck John Carpenter for stealing from Howard Hawks. Fuck David Cronenberg for stealing from whoever made the fly. Fuck Edgar Wright for making nostalgia porn. And fuck Hammer Horror for stealing from Universal Horror.
"I hate these things blindly based on what they represent" but while you're at it throw us some cash by buying these creatively bereft craptaculars through our link to Amazon at the bottom of the piece!
Fine, fine. I'll be the one to defend "Weird" Al. The phrase "to my mind it has less creative scruples than a 'Weird' Al song" while paired with what your saying about these books seems like your saying Mr. Yankovic is creatively bankrupt. While it was just one sentence in your piece, I must chime in here. While it's true that "Weird" Al does make parody songs, they are miles beyond 99% of other similar parody songs, and not only in how clever the lyrics are, but also in how Al makes them according to certain rules. Not only does Al never actually make fun of the original artist, he gets their permission before putting the parody on his album. Class act. Not to mention that several songs on each of his albums are originals, and are quite good, too. So next time you want to compare something that you hate to a hack artist, pick someone who actually IS a hack artist. (Oh, and FUCKING 8 TIMES!!!!!)
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.