# Retelling classic stories...



## J Dean (Feb 9, 2009)

What are your thoughts on it?I'll be honest: I hate it, and yesterday reminded me of one of the reasons why I rarely watch movies anymore.

My family and I went and saw MIRROR, MIRROR yesterday and I did not enjoy it-at all. I label it "cinematic vandalism." The story of Snow White is a classic work of the Grimm Bros., and for Hollywood to


Spoiler



bastardize


 it like they did (and like they will probably do with Snow White and the Huntsman) tells me two things:

1.) It tells me that some writers cannot help but vandalize classic works by inserting their own cultural biases into the story. Snow White is basically turned into another Elizabeth Swann, while the prince at times seems to be emasculated. Now, I don't have a problem with a strong female character, but _what I saw on the screen was not Snow White!_ To run after another established character and rewrite the character into somebody completely different strikes me more as a sort of (lazy) activism than real artistic creativity.

Furthermore, you can make a female character strong while not demeaning the male characters as well (Joss Whedon does this quite well; so does J. Michael Strazcynski). Trying to make a strong female character by weakening the male characters is slipshod hyper-feminism, which does nothing but make many women roll their eyes at the ridiculousness of the portrayal and turn the male audience off.

2.) That Hollywood is either running out of writers with original ideas or is too lazy (or too timid) to take on original ideas. It seems as if remakes are becoming more and more prominent. I found out that _another_ reboot of Spider Man will be coming out in the near future! Come on! You mean to tell me that there is that much of a lack of imagination among Hollywood writers and execs? While I didn't care for it overall, at least the movie _Hancock_ had an original premise. Same with _Sin City_. And movies like _The Matrix_ and _Inception_ at least took steps in new directions with fresh ideas without having to resort to "let's take an old story and retell it."

Anyway, enough of my opinion. Anybody else think that retelling stories gets old? That more time should be devoted to stories which people can look at and say "Wow! That's really different!" instead of "Oh, nice retelling."?


----------



## Steverino (Jan 5, 2011)

J Dean said:


> Furthermore, you can make a female character strong while not demeaning the male characters as well (Joss Whedon does this quite well; so does J. Michael Strazcynski).


Chris Carter never gets credit for this, but he should. Where would we be without Mulder and Scully?

Anyhow, movies are pricey to make, and production companies dream of guaranteed hits non-bombs. So why not rehash an idea? It shouldn't fail, at least.

For true originality, run to your nearest indie author. 

Then again, with the increasing availability of production technology... indie movies are up and coming (if you like SF, find _Primer_).


----------



## Chad Wilde Author (Mar 16, 2012)

Well, for the current trend you have Tim Burton to blame.  After Alice In Wonderland backed the Brinks truck up to Disney studios, they've been trotting out every public domain fairy tale to strike it rich.  But Hollywood isn't about being original.  It's about making the most money with the least amount of risk.  That's why things like Tranformers 4 and Battleship are in the pipeline.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

J Dean said:


> Anybody else think that retelling stories gets old? That more time should be devoted to stories which people can look at and say "Wow! That's really different!" instead of "Oh, nice retelling."?


I could go on all night commiserating with my long lost cousin J over this, but instead let me offer my take on the discussion that lead to the movie _Troy_, which was supposed to be based on the _Iliad_.

Producer 1: "This _Iliad _ story has been around for over two and half thousand years-did you know that?"

Producer 2: "That's a long time. It really speaks to the story's popularity."

Producer 1: "So are you thinking what I'm thinking?"

Producer 2: "Yeah, we should _completely rewrite it_!"

Producer 1: "Absolutely! We can make it way better!"

Seriously, how much more ridiculous can it get than that?


----------



## KateEllison (Jul 9, 2011)

I love retellings. I think it takes a distinct type of creativity to take something old/familiar and reinvent it as something new while still playing within the established parameters and without straying too far as to be unrecognizable. It's like writing a sonnet as opposed to writing free verse. I get a very different kind of enjoyment from watching or reading a retold story over reading or watching a completely new and original one. Both are nice, but in different ways.

Also, retellings are as old as time. Shakespeare, anyone? I believe (I took that Shakespeare course years ago, so I may be mistaken) the only original story he wrote was The Tempest. Romeo and Juliet, for instance, was just a retelling of an already-popular story (The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet) that was only a few decades old when Shakespeare retold it. Kinda like what hollywood does.

Obviously I'm biased, because some of my books are retellings. I actually have a whole series I'm working on that's modernized/alternate versions of fairy tales, and a lot of people have told me they adore them and love the concept. It's hardly new, but it's so much fun to write and read, in my opinion. I actually find them HARDER to write, because I am constrained by the original tale. But that's just part of the challenge for me, and I relish it.

But to each his own...


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

KateEllison said:


> I love retellings. I think it takes a distinct type of creativity to take something old/familiar and reinvent it as something new while still playing within the established parameters and without straying too far as to be unrecognizable.


We're talking apples and oranges. I can't speak for the others, of course, but I have no problem with retelling an old story. The Greek tragedians used the same plots and characters over and over again, but gave them a slightly new twist each time-sometimes it worked, sometimes not. But we're not complaining about that; we're complaining about the fact that Hollywood takes old stories and squeezes them into the same mind-numbing mold it uses for every story.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Chad Wilde Author said:


> Well, for the current trend you have Tim Burton to blame. After Alice In Wonderland backed the Brinks truck up to Disney studios, they've been trotting out every public domain fairy tale to strike it rich. But Hollywood isn't about being original. It's about making the most money with the least amount of risk. That's why things like Tranformers 4 and Battleship are in the pipeline.


_Battleship_ is going to be good. None of us wants it to be good, and it will be a while before many people admit it's good, but it's directed by Peter Berg, and that guy makes nothing but good movies.

Maybe he'll make me look the fool a few weeks from now. But I bet a lot of the talk about _Battleship_--which is a completely idiotic idea--winds up being "Yeah, I thought this would suck, but I think I liked it pretty well."

Hey, I should make a real point with this! Such as that any idea, no matter how dumb or derivative, can be a good time with the right talent at the helm. In conclusion, if you're going to write a book with an unoriginal concept, make sure you're Peter Berg.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

I like good movies. I hate bad movies. Whether it's a remake, a retelling, a reimagination or a reboot doesn't matter. If it's good, I like it. If it's bad, I don't.



Edward W. Robertson said:


> _Battleship_ is going to be good. None of us wants it to be good, and it will be a while before many people admit it's good, but it's directed by Peter Berg, and that guy makes nothing but good movies.


^This^


----------



## Jean E (Aug 29, 2011)

I think retelling is fine. As has been mentioned on the thread already so much of literature is a retelling of stories and observations of the ancients and there were not that many themes to begin with. But in addition to the story there is the _telling_, and that is where talent can shine. Old themes are retold as fresh, engaging stories, not because writers steal them but because after six thousand years of scribbling, what is there left to say? It is what we do with the core story, what other elements we introduce, setting, characterisation and so on that makes a new tale.

For instance there are significant reflections of Lord of the Rings in Babylon 5. But B5 it is a hell of a story and one of my all time favourites. Seriously, I go all teary eyed every time they blow that thing up in the final series because Mr. S. makes me care so much for the station and the story that took place there. This is a far cry from the inane effort that passes for storytelling in Hollywood. It's not necessarily the writers I blame, the story and format is all decided before hand, it's like the writing version of painting by numbers. No point in looking to those corporations for thoughtful, insightful entertainment. The golden calf is all that matters there.

Good point about weak male characters around strong female ones. Why? No idea. Maybe such writers think someone always has to be 'the strong one' and can't imaging, never mind write, equality. What annoys me even more is when you get one strong female and the women around her are portrayed as stereotypically as ever. This makes the strong woman seem like an oddity and it drives me nuts.


----------



## StephenEngland (Nov 2, 2011)

I really, really don't know who likes weak male characters. Men don't like to see themselves portrayed that way, and very few women I know will have anything to do with a weak man. Perhaps indicative of the fact that in some circles, things are more agenda-driven than market-driven.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

When spending $100 Million on a movie Hollywood tends to look at the risk factor. A popular story is less of a risk than a new one and a timeless story even less of a risk. But, Hollywood is not always right, sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. It is a gamble. Look at John Carter?

The Bros Grimm collected many folktales and there were many Snow Whites. 

What I don't like is Disney trying to trademark the Snow White name as their own.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

Chad Wilde Author said:


> Well, for the current trend you have Tim Burton to blame. After Alice In Wonderland backed the Brinks truck up to Disney studios, they've been trotting out every public domain fairy tale to strike it rich. But Hollywood isn't about being original. It's about making the most money with the least amount of risk. That's why things like Tranformers 4 and Battleship are in the pipeline.


I'm going to dig around and see if I can find it, but there was an article in the Hollywood trade papers about six months ago about these upcoming Snow White retellings. "Alice" is indeed to blame. Two creative teams looked at Alice. One believed it was the visual spectacle that made it a box office success and they are the team that put together Mirror Mirror. The other team thought it was the dark, creepy factor and they're the ones putting out Snow White and The Huntsman. Both are trying to tap into whatever made people buy a ticket to Alice.

Hooray for Hollywood.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Steverino said:


> For true originality, run to your nearest indie author.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

I love reworkings of fairy tales. I think it honors and understands the folk tradition, the idea of stories changing and evolving, and carrying different meanings and morals over time. Doesn't mean I think every reworking is a good one, but I can't get enough of the concept.

The "Grimms" collected stories -- these stories were not the originals, nor were they the final version. Different societies extrapolate different things. Little Red Riding Hood can be a warning about not listening to one's parents, or the dangers of going against society, or it can be a reference to prostitution. It can be a bedtime story for children, or an amusing tale told at court.



These stories endure because they speak to your psyche different than they do mine and they hold up a mirror to who we are.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

KateEllison said:


> Also, retellings are as old as time. Shakespeare, anyone? I believe (I took that Shakespeare course years ago, so I may be mistaken) the only original story he wrote was The Tempest. Romeo and Juliet, for instance, was just a retelling of an already-popular story (The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet) that was only a few decades old when Shakespeare retold it. Kinda like what hollywood does.


Shakespeare also has characters in Midsummer Nights Dream doing an unintentionally comical version of Pyramis and Thisbe, which is really just another precursor to Romeo and Juliet.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I don't mind it.  And when you think about it, every story is really a retelling of some other story.  Seriously, just about every plot out there was done by Shakespeare and he got his ideas from the Greek plays, comedies and tragedies that were already out there.  So, every plot-line in some way, retells a tale that has been told before somewhere, somehow.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> I love reworkings of fairy tales.
> These stories endure because they speak to your psyche different than they do mine and they hold up a mirror to who we are.


There are two kinds of mirrors: the one reflects back some truth about the human condition, the other merely reflects our basest contemporary conceits. Take Disney's god-awful _Hercules_. It's not a story about a hero; it's the apotheosis of the celebrity pasted onto the ancient world. Tell me if you've heard this before. "Herc" is the awkward kid who "feels different" because he's got an incredible gift that no one appreciates (what teen can't relate?). He finds out that he's really a god (naturally!) and seeks out Philoctetes, the washed-up manager, to train him. Meanwhile, the unscrupulous movie producer (Hades) cooks up a scheme to take over the cosmos (Hollywood). It just gets worse from there. Sure, James Woods is funny and Rip Torn does a good Zeus. But it has no redeeming value whatsoever. It just panders to teenagers' vanity, cultivating that that very bad desire to be famous.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

In my earlier post I acknowledge that all retellings aren't automatically good. Disney's Hercules might be awful, but you aren't disproving my mirror comment, not in this celebrity obsessed culture. I didn't say that the mirror always shows something good, worthy, or enriching, just that these stories evolve.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> In my earlier post I acknowledge that all retellings aren't automatically good. Disney's Hercules might be awful, but you aren't disproving my mirror comment, not in this celebrity obsessed culture. I didn't say that the mirror always shows something good, worthy, or enriching, just that these stories evolve.


I agree, we've been telling the same old stories since cavemen were sitting around the campfire. We just think of new ways to tell them. Sometimes they are good, sometimes they are bad.


----------



## *DrDLN* (dr.s.dhillon) (Jan 19, 2011)

KateEllison said:


> ...Obviously I'm biased, because some of my books are retellings. I actually have a whole series I'm working on that's modernized/alternate versions of fairy tales, and a lot of people have told me they adore them and love the concept. It's hardly new, but it's so much fun to write and read, in my opinion. I actually find them HARDER to write, because I am constrained by the original tale. But that's just part of the challenge for me, and I relish it....


I like those old stories that refine our moral sense and have a good moral to it. I love to read if you have such stories and might even review them. Wish you all the best, Kate.


----------



## Cuechick (Oct 28, 2008)

It all depends how it is done... I saw the trailer for Snow White and the Huntsman and it gave me chills. There are few movies these days I will pay to see in the theater, but this will be one of them...





I also notice that Disney has worked hard to promote "Mirror, Mirror" as a "family" movie and perfect for kids... which SW&TH is clearly not...


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Steverino said:


> For true originality, run to your nearest indie author.


  

Mike


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> In my earlier post I acknowledge that all retellings aren't automatically good. Disney's Hercules might be awful, but you aren't disproving my mirror comment, not in this celebrity obsessed culture. I didn't say that the mirror always shows something good, worthy, or enriching, just that these stories evolve.


Didn't suggest that my expansion of the mirror metaphor was a refutation. It was an attempt to get the thread back on track. That the same stories are told time and again in new ways is a platitude no one disagrees with, so there's no point debating it. The vulgarization of fairytales, on the other hand, is worth talking about. Alas, the platitude won out.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

WHDean said:


> Didn't suggest that my expansion of the mirror metaphor was a refutation. It was an attempt to get the thread back on track. That the same stories are told time and again in new ways is a platitude no one disagrees with, so there's no point debating it. The vulgarization of fairytales, on the other hand, is worth talking about. Alas, the platitude won out.


The version you first read or heard still exists. The new versions bring people back to the old versions. I have some issue with all Disney remakes. I even think that Once Upon a Time is seriously flawed, but I think the existence of these reimaginings is good. They exist, and people remember the older version they first read, and then they tell other people.

I didn't say that stories change and evolve as a platitude; I said it as the reason that the changes don't bother me -- I like following the evolution, and meeting again and again old friends in new guises.

Some of it might be growing up on romance novels, and how they followed "The Cinderella Formula." I never got into the mindset that the stories were etched in stone.

I also read  a few years ago, and each story had some of the most popular variations, and explained the history and back story of each tale.

In the last year, I also read three YAs that reimagined these stories.

Ash is reworking of Cinderella. The style brought in Celtic and Asian traditions, and the main character without muss or scandal fell in love with the court huntress, not the handsome prince. I loved that, but also how it dealt with the grief of losing a mother. Fairies were treated as dangerous here, which is how they were seen in some of the oldest tales. In this case, a new tale both brought something new to a modern audience, but also exposed them to a world of other folktales they might have never discovered.

Sisters Red has two Little Red Riding Hoods -- sisters. After their grandmother was killed and one of them was scarred by a fenris (the book's version of the Big Bad Wolf) they learn to fight. One of them loves it, and one of them does it out of love for the other. It's very much a story about sisterly love and figuring out your own path through the woods. (Set in modern times.)

The third book was Tender Morsels, and was based on Snow White and Rose Red. As a lot of YA does these days, there are difficult topics here -- rape, incest, and the repercussions of that -- but the style of writing has an old-fashioned, lyrical feel. This one really made me cry and stayed with me. I cried so hard over what was not a happy ending -- well, it's debatable -- that I was a little regretful for having read it. Yes, part of me is still a girl thinking everything should be fair. (Perhaps another part of the legacy of fairy tales.)

 

Anyhow, to me this means that this stories aren't forgotten, and that they still get to -- in some form or several -- live in the reader's memory.

I know that this probably reads as the thread being off track, but the heart of the discussion is about the importance of -- to use it again -- a different path through the woods. Off track might be the point. And a thread on a discussion board? Never goes where you or I point.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

Like someone above said, I enjoy a good retelling and hate a bad one. And it isn't even about how far the retelling strays from the original tale. For example, both "Mirror, Mirror" and "Snow White & the Huntsman" seem hardly connected to the more familiar version of Snow White. Yet "Snow White and the Huntsman" looks to be an awesome movie, while "Mirror, Mirror"... wasn't. Then again, I wasn't the target age for the audience. 

And I agree with the OP that the part of the Prince in "Mirror, Mirror" was pretty embarrassing. But I don't think it was a gender statement, so much as an attempt to slip in some humor for the kids. The Prince's more helpless moments and the scenes of him panting and whining like a dog where meant to be funny and, to kids, probably were. Snow White couldn't be shown as dog-like because she was the title character and had to be portrayed as brave, smart, quick, strong, etc. Everyone else was shown as less so, to make her seem more extraordinary. That lack of subtlety is pretty typical in kids' movies and I don't think it bothers the intended audience.


----------

