Am I the only one who can see that live-action retreads of animated shows are generally a bad idea? More generally, modern remakes of old TV shows are a bad idea. One of two things always happens: Either they stick strictly to the original material, keeping the style as close to the original as possible -- which leaves it stiff and two-dimensional to today's audiences; or they "modernize" or "re-imagine" it -- which usually makes it so far from the original as to be almost unrecognizable.

By way of example:

The Flintstones	sucked. the sequels moreso
Rocky and Bullwinkle	sucked
Casper	was okay til the end, then it sucked. The sequels just plain sucked
Inspector Gadget	sucked like a black hole, then they have the nerve to make a sequel with a different actor in the title role.
Garfield	sucked -- I mean really, Bill Murray?

...you get the idea.

So now they want to make a live-action version of Speed Racer? It was proposed by Vince Vaughn (who, of course, will be in it), and will be written and directed by the Wachowski brothers -- why do I get the feeling I am going to hate it?

Does anybody in Hollywood have an original idea anymore?

And, yes, I know about the superhero movies. Just remember, those were comic books before they were cartoons. And they have had their share of suckage over the years. Anyone remeber the Spiderman live-action TV series? The Hulk (yes, it was a popular series, but as a translation of the comic book, it was pretty bad)? Don't get me started on that awful recent Hulk movie.

Maybe a group of us can get together and buy these people a clue.