MovieChat Forums > Saturday Night Fever (1977) Discussion > this won't be remade

this won't be remade

posted 6 years ago by PeterBlues (790)
27 replies | jump to latest

reason? since disco was a thing of the 1970's. i had never seen this until now, and i wasn't expecting at all the brutal language, as well as travolta's weird camera body shots, it was also difficult to picture him now after seeing him appear in movies for decades playing a lad of 19, the bee gees tunes are very familiar though as they've reached out far beyond from this movie only, but most of all i was surprised by this sort of language in a teen movie, if they had just dropped or changed some dialogue it could have been suited for a younger audience i guess and more suitable for airing as well, but does any of this matter anymore in today's "anything goes" times anyway? it's like a mix with other movies and not just a... disco story? i've read disco killed rock n roll 😡 and ruined further careers and upcoming music releases from some of the greatest rock n' roll legends most disturbing according to me little richard!.

🕺

driftin this odd atmosphere,
not intact without you here,
pink sky while im blue,
wind call out your name,
turns dim sky heavy rain,
as sun and moon cant find their place,
since madeleine hardly anymore comes around here.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Of course not, no need to. It’s a classic. It was never meant to be a teen movie. Travolta was a teen idol from Welcome Back Kotter so the film was popular among teens. This was a drama about a guy going nowhere in life, living with his parents, hanging out with his idiot friends, and blowing his weekly paycheck at the disco. He meets Stephanie who is in the midst of escaping her Brooklyn life and he sees his life for what it is.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

Agreed it was never meant to be a teen movie. It's not a teen movie, it's not a musical, it's not about the glamour of the Disco... it's about being an adult with a shitty job and a dead-end life. And the futility of trying to escape your life at the local disco, and the shallowness of glamour and popularity.

The setting was a wonderful slice-of-life, but the fact is that the theme is universal. Everywhere there are young people with shitty jobs and dysfunctional families and no real hope for anything better, they feel just like Tony Manero.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Reading your excellent comment, I thought about “Good Will Hunting”. Another film about a guy with a shitty job, dysfunctional family history, going nowhere. Both films end with some hope because the characters see a way out by taking the risk of leaving the life they know for a new life.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

Come to think of it... "Wreck-It Ralph" has exactly the same theme! Crappy life and shitty job and the seeming impossibility of getting anything better!

I think that's the only time that story has been used in an actual children's film.

[–] wanton87 (934) 6 years ago

I would tend to agree. It’s too era specific, and of an era that doesn’t particularly stand out as anything special to many.

I’m old enough to remember the disco era, and even at the time, there was a large percentage of the youth that thoroughly disliked it. I recall referring to a classmate friend of mine (a long haired rocker dude) as “Disco Steve Bailey” (Not his real name). It upset him so, that he informed me that he would kick my ass if I ever did it again 😀

I’m probably older than most of the people on this site, and I was just a kid at the time, being around 14 years of age at the height of the disco era, and I actually did attend a few discotheques in the day. When I think back to wearing those angel flight pants, satin shirts, and the feathered hair, and at how incredibly ridiculous that it looked, I want to punch myself in the face! Though my understanding is that it’s still quite popular in certain countries, such as in Latin America.

[–] ozz969 (363) 2 years ago

I might still have the Twisted Sister t-shirt I had the phrase "Disco Sucks" added on the back...

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

If this movie is ever remade, it won't be a direct remake, it'll be a modern story about a guy who has a shitty life, with a crap job and asshole friends and a dysfunctional family and no good options, whose only joy in life comes at his local hip-hop club.

The problem with remaking this movie is the same as the problem with the story in the 1970s, which was that there's really no easy way for a guy like Tony (or his modern equivalent) to step into a better life. I never liked the ending to this movie, because Tony has no job skills and isn't going to have a better life if he moves to Manhattan, he just hopes to live in his girlfriend's apartment instead of his family's house, while working some crap dead-end job and going to the disco if he wants to feel like somebody.

[–] strntz (10968) 2 years ago

He didn't have any job skills certainly, but he did have dance skills. In the sequel anyway, he made it to Broadway as a dancer. The ending of that film at least suggests he had a bright future.

Absolutely true on any remake. This story doesn't need a disco specifically to carry the plot and would be easily adaptable to modern situations. I wouldn't watch it but it's doable.

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

The sequel was... unrealistic, to put it mildly. I know enough about dance to know that Tony never would have made it to Broadway, he was an above-average disco dancer, but the kind of "jazz dance" they did in the film is very different from disco, and is as difficult to learn as gymnastics and takes years of training, which he didn't have and wouldn't have had in the years between the two films. No, he wasn't a trained dancer, he was a disco dancer, and to earn a living as a disco dancer he'd have to teach disco lessons or be a go-go dancer at a club (probably a gay club), or done extra/background work in movies and TV shows with disco scenes. A few years later he might have made a few bucks appearing in music videos, but in 1977 there was no music-video industry.

Really, "STayin' Alive" is one of the worst sequels ever made, it was written and directed by Sylvester Stallone, who knew nothing about dance, Broadway, disco, or young jerks like the guys from the first movie.

[–] strntz (10968) 2 years ago

Yeah, but the actual talent of the actor isn't what we're believing if you're referring to Travolta's dancing in the film (supposing). You know dance, and I know engineering. I cringe often at some of the stuff I see on screen. But to me and I suspect most folks, what we saw from Travolta was convincing enough to think he could make it as a Broadway dancer. I mean, what I saw Travolta do in those dance moves was convincing enough for me, and I used to be a regular Broadway attendee (until NY returned to being a shithole again).

In the sequel, Tony was several years removed from his disco days and it's no stretch to think he might have studied dance somewhere. Some people are just naturals - he might have gotten up to speed fairly quickly. That at least is more realistic to me than when I involuntarily yelled "BULLSHIT" in a crowded theater when Bruce Willis lit the jet fuel on the runway and it caught the jetliner and it exploded. My ribs still smart where my wife gave me the elbow.

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

Well like I said, director Stallone knew diddly-squat about dance, and I know enough about dance to look at the screen and see that John Travolta didn't belong in a Broadway production. Travolta is a naturally talented dancer, and he does have a natural grace and musicality (rhythm) and he's played the guy who can dance in a lot of movies and done it well... but he doesn't have the technique of a Broadway jazz dancer and the intensive training he didn't get him to the level the character is supposed to be at. Seriously, don't try to defend "Stayin' Alive", its only value is as a masterpiece of camp, and I love it for that!

But yeah, anyone who knows anything about any subject is always going to have their bullshit-in-a-crowded-theater moments. My favorite was the Wolverine movie where a character fakes their death, and says I swear to God "They gave me hydrochlorothiazide, it slowed down my heartbeat", to explain their being dead an hour earlier. FYI beta blockers are the medicine that slows down your heartbeat, while hydrochlorothiazide is a diuretic, a pill that just makes you pee! I tune into that movie every damn time it comes on, just so I can hear that line.

[–] jonathan_k80 (6436) 2 years ago

Disco was garbage back then and is still garbage. Yet it still rears its ugly head occasionally. It's been dead since 1980 and should stay that way. Four decades later it's time to bury it... permanently.

It was because of this particular movie that the disco craze took off. We don't need any remakes of it.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
Who said this was a teen movie? It isn't. It's more about the disco scene.
As for this being remade? Dear LORD! I hope not!
Possible? Sure. Film makers make/have made period pieces all the time.

[–] bigbadwolf666 (4707) 6 years ago

who the fuck would watch this remade?

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
Beats me!

[–] bigbadwolf666 (4707) 6 years ago

lol

[–] CastroEulis (381) 2 years ago

I'd definitely watch a sequel lol. It would be like watching Disco Tony in Mystery Men.

[–] TheArgentinian (6505) 3 years ago

it's not really about disco either.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Except... Anything doesn't go. Much of the language in this film would be considered "politically incorrect" by the Thought Police today, so a remake would no doubt be watered-down, PG-13 at best, and have none of the realism SNF depicted. I hope they don't remake it, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did some stupid live crap on television like they did with the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

They should set the remake back in the 70s. That way they can stay faithful to that 70s sensibility.

[–] TheArgentinian (6505) 3 years ago

A remake starring the people who actually created and frequented disco in the early days: black gay men. It could work.

[–] Roguemail (1566) 2 years ago

There was actually an edited version released in the UK when it was released in 1977. It was cut down to the equivalent of a PG, with the swearing, nudity and sex removed.

The primary reason for this was that Travolta was a massive heart throb among teenage girls, who were obviously too young to see the movies in cinemas, ans this was pre video.

[–] marktayloruk (2388) 2 years ago

Did.anyone really think that teenage girls didn't know the words or about sex?

[–] modica (4169) 2 years ago

Who said that this is a movie meant to be shown to teens. It's about teens, but isn't necessarily for teens. Much deeper than that. Even after all the years since I have first seen it, the movie resonates with me like not many movies have since. Brilliant movie with so many layers. Love it.

[–] strntz (10968) 2 years ago

I was a teen when this movie came out, and everyone I knew went to see it. A big percentage of the audience back then were teens and young adults.

I think it was directed at teens. Travolta was a big draw and Tony's problems in life and his associations with friends and difficulties with his family resonated strongly with teens.

As far as its grittiness, it was not over the top for teens in the 70s.

[–] modica (4169) 2 years ago

I was a teen also and saw it when it first came out. I was 15. I never thought it was really that graphic or outrageous. Teens handled it just fine. When I saw it there were teens, young adults and older people in the theater.

[–] BourbonKing (5666) 2 years ago

This movie actually made Italian-Americans look more nasty and unappealing than any of the Godfather movies, but by the time it was released being of Italian ancestry was very popular already so it gets a pass. If this came out in the 60s then even the American Italian Anti-Defamation League would have protested its existence.