Why a remake might be better

Any "work of art" is necessarily a product of its time. Attempts to remake it alter it in ways that almost always weaken or destroy the "point" of the original. (Contrast Boudou Saved from Drowing with Down and Out in Beverly Hills.)

One might argue that modern technology makes possible a huge leap in the seeming realism of Forbidden Planet. The fact is that, even 60 years later, most of Forbidden Planet's mechanical and optical effects hold up. The worst thing about the film is that it's obviously shot on a sound stage.

The other justification for a remake is that there's something "wrong" with the original. Sure, the script is clunky, * the acting variable, and the direction uninspired. None of that prevented Forbidden Planet from being a, and arguably the, major influence on "popular" science fiction for nearly a half century.

For me, the "wrong" thing that justifies a remake is the original's failure to clarify and develop the issue at the center of the story -- does man have a right to meddle in God's domain?

As Doc Ostrow points out, the Great Machine could create matter in any form -- including living creatures. (The tiger and deer are Morbius's creations. They were not brought from Earth.) The Krell were punished for their blasphemy by self-destruction. A clever story could make good drama of this. (No, I don't have any ideas at the moment.)

A remake must include Robby, the greatest movie robot ever. (I'm willing to consider demurrals from those who prefer The False Maria.) Perhaps someone could find a way to perfectly mimic Marvin Miller's voice.

By the way, the "remake" of The Thing is actually a "make". The Hawks version is an atrociously idiotic mangling of Campbell's short story "Who Goes There?", designed to appeal to a dull audience. The Carpenter version, though gratuitously violent, sticks closely to the story.

* Despite his name, Cyril Hume was born and bred in the US. If you've watched The Rifleman, you know what superb scripts he could turn out.

I would love to produce a remake of this movie. The original is great and stands on its own merits. But, it is a little dated in dialog and effects. A remake should not be seen as an opportunity to inject political correctness into the story or upstage the story and message with CGI. I know I'll catch hell for this, but the story only has room for one female. The dynamics of this single female with the all male crew members and her father is an important part of the story.

I'm surprised no-one's mentioned the score. How would you "update" the music and sound effects? They're incredible just as they are.

Don't remake this movie. Instead, make something new that riffs off the basic themes of Forbidden Planet just as Forbidden Planet borrows from the Tempest and all the other works that preceded it.

Some of the other commenters are exactly right. Hollywood would just screw up a remake. It wouldn't be any more "realistic" it would just reflect early 21st century neuroses instead of mid 20th century ones. I'm already groaning at the thought of the climactic fight scene between the captain and the first officer, over a walkway above the Krell power plant, once the first officer's plans to sabotage the mission and take the power supply for himself are found out.

The best argument against a remake is every remake made of a "classic" Scifi movie. None have been even close to the original, all filled with lots of cgi ( the time machine), and a revamped and usually ridiculous storyline (war of the worlds and the day the earth stood still). Not to mention today's actors who only know how to shout and jump around in front of the camera. Yes the cinematography and sets will be better than 60 years ago, but those elements don't guarantee a good film.

Please save the PC nonsense and the fake looking cgi. This movie is perfect and a remake would only dilute it.

I'm not against a remake but your post (and most of the replies) fail to mention the central idea of the movie which is the God-like powers achieved by the Krell which led to their destruction due to the subconscious forces they were unable to control. The idea of technology being used to enable the mind to create and move matter is one of the most fascinating ideas in science fiction.

Frankly, I don't trust that that idea could be explored properly by any modern director. You'd end up with some CGI *beep* that missed the whole point by a huge margin.

If a remake happens I hope it can be done with the same care and respect with which Blade Runner was handled. That was a visually stunning movie wrapped around a big idea.

Colonial Marines? Jesus.

true

"Touchdoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooown Auburn"

One thing I'd like changed is the ending. It's just so overwrought with Walter Pidgeon's bombastic acting. Not to mention the vague resolution. Morbius tells the monster he denies it, the gauges go down and he collapses with no sign of injury. One can say he lost the will the live or something like that, but it's just such a cop-out.

I know it may be too close to being an action scene and probably too gory for some, but I wouldn't mind seeing less denial from Morbius and a more steely acceptance. He triggers the self-destruct himself, makes the trite "Take care of Alta for me" speech to the captain then throws himself against the monster, going out in a blaze of glory. No Morbius, no monster. Yes, it's the old "suicide to stop what's within me" trope, but it's appropriate.