Meet the Parents Actually a Remake of ’92 Movie
The original Meet the Parents was executive produced by Emo Philips. If that information doesn’t raise your eyebrows, then you obviously were not attuned to the avant garde comic scene of the early 80s, (Andy Kaufman, Pee Wee Herman).
But if so, then it probably tells you a lot about what kind of movie the original might be. It was directed by and stars Greg Gliena. The story apparently follows the same general outline as the remake but with less emphasis on the girlfriend’s father and with a much, much more deadpan approach.
I say apparently because, truth be told, I haven’t seen the movie. And so I was willing to make the bet that you hadn’t either. I would love to see it, but I can’t. Or, at least, it will be very difficult for me to do so. It’s not like I can go to my local video store and rent it. It’s not like I can go to Amazon.com and buy it. It’s almost as though the movie doesn’t exist.
Apparently in order to make the sequel, a deal was set that the original would not be made available. Makes me suspect the original might be funnier. But I could be wrong. It’s been known to happen. Still, when I do go to my local video store, I usually am capable of renting both the original and remakes.
I can rent both the Rat Pack version of Ocean’s Eleven as well as the recent remake. Heck, I can even rent both version of Psycho and they are exact duplicates of each other!
So I can’t help but wonder if maybe the good folks at Universal, et al, don’t want us to see the original not because it’s so incredibly better and funnier, but rather that it proves that a movie doesn’t have to cost 70 million dollars and be staffed by huge stars in order to be entertaining.
If the movie industry ever figures out that the star system is a bunch of crap and that movies would be better if the right actor was cast in the right part instead of the biggest financial draw being cast, they might be forced into actually making good movies instead of disposable product that makes its profit in two weeks and is out of the theaters completely in a month.
Think of the consequences: If a movie didn’t have to star Tom Cruise or Julia Roberts that would be 20 million off the budget right there along with the slightly decreasing salaries paid to lower-level stars. Suddenly, a movie that would have cost 100 million to make is down to 45 million.
And since the movie doesn’t have to be a huge blockbuster to make a profit, costs can be cut on exotic location filming and unnecessary action and stunt sequences. Now we’re down to 25 million. We’ve cut our costs by 75%, meaning we don’t have to spend another 25 million advertising the movie so we can have that huge opening day in case it turns out we made a turkey. What would be the result of all this?
Lower ticket prices for you and me. Drinks and popcorn for a family of four that doesn’t cost as much as a steak dinner for two. Affordability for all!
We can’t have that. Better just to go ahead and pay the star what he’s not really worth and sell him or her instead of trying to sell the actual story. It’s much easier to promote a movie as a Robert DeNiro/Ben Stiller movie instead of trying to convince people to come see a story about a clumsy guy having his first meeting with his suspicious future father-in-law.
I mean who’d care about seeing that right? Certainly nobody in 1992 did.
