The Roadhouse 'Reboot' was just as good/better than the original - Change my mind

blaseblase said:
The biggest issue was the lack of any sex scenes or female nudity. We got Conor's ass but zero nudity from any of the chicks? That's a crime against cheesy 80s movies. I also think making the owner of the roadhouse female didn't work because she was more attractive than the love interest and had more chemistry with the protagonist. Should've made her the love interest and added a sex scene.
Click to expand...

Prime Video’s original shows and movies always seem to feature like 10X as much male nudity as female. I don’t know if it’s an agenda on the part of female and/or gay leadership within Amazon but it’s just cocks galore on Prime for some reason.
 
Bob Gray said:
Goddamn, what a bunch of negative Nancies in this thread.

Lets establish some things:

1. The original Roadhouse is an absolutely terrible, god-awful movie. It's superb entertainment, but only if you're capable of enjoying it ironically.

2. So what exactly are you expecting from a remake?

A Roadhouse remake isnt meant to be great, its meant to be enjoyed. The original movie is complete garbage, but so bad that it's good. The remake is one of the most unpretentious, absolutely give no fucks "just be entertained" movies to come out since I cant remember when. Theyre remaking a movie thats so stupidly bad that you enjoy it. So what do you do? You certainly don't try to make a great movie. And you cant make cheese on purpose, it has to be born out of legitimate effort. So you make an entertaining movie that understands it cant be taken seriously and then you can have the same sense of dumb fun. That's literally the only aim this movie has. The fights were shot in a completely new and original way that was kind of interesting to watch. And you know what? Conor killed it. Had some of the biggest laughs in the movie. If you didnt laugh out loud when he just crashes the van into a tree theres nothing the movie could have done for you. Good God, he had the same grin when he dives into the goddamn ocean.

Doug Liman has always been one of the most underrated directors around, imo, and hes capable of pulling humor out of thin air which he manages to do a few times.

Basically: Jesus Christ, people. Its a remake of one of the worst movies ever made. Just have some dumb fun for a couple of hours, just like if you were watching the original.
Click to expand...
I'd rather be a negative nancy or a debbie downer, than a Ronnie the Retard.

Number 1, the original is not terrible. Silly story, but just about everything about it is an improvement over this pile of remade shit.

Number 2, the remake isnt fun. Its uncomfortable. Horrible acting with horrible lines is cringe city.

Number 3, a fucking dancer with a mullet did better fight scenes than an actual mma fighter.


This is not hard to understand. We smell shit when we stop on it, you cant convince us otherwise cuz you simply have bad taste.



Christ on a stick, I'm having a MUCH funner time criticizing this movie than watching it.
 
TrueBias said:
I'd rather be a negative nancy or a debbie downer, than a Ronnie the Retard.

Number 1, the original is not terrible. Silly story, but just about everything about it is an improvement over this pile of remade shit.

Number 2, the remake isnt fun. Its uncomfortable. Horrible acting with horrible lines is cringe city.

Number 3, a fucking dancer with a mullet did better fight scenes than an actual mma fighter.


This is not hard to understand. We smell shit when we stop on it, you cant convince us otherwise cuz you simply have bad taste.



Christ on a stick, I'm having a MUCH funner time criticizing this movie than watching it.
Click to expand...
How many posts ITT thread do you reckon you've made menstruating about it? Is it winning Oscars? No. Was it a couple of hours of escapism? Yes. The original was caked up with cheese and overacting, and so was this. It's barmy you're still whingeing about it.
 
Jesus X said:
The reboot was somehow more cheesy than the original. Jake came off as a sociopath jerk too where patrick swayze was likeable.
Click to expand...

Dalton 2.0 was definitely a sociopath/psychopath. The scene where he kills the biker leader would not have been out of place in a horror movie.
 
Law Talkin’ Guy said:
Prime Video’s original shows and movies always seem to feature like 10X as much male nudity as female. I don’t know if it’s an agenda on the part of female and/or gay leadership within Amazon but it’s just cocks galore on Prime for some reason.
Click to expand...
The Boys springs to mind :D I have to admit, the amount of Conor's ass we saw they either did a good job of strapping his willy up or he's a wee willy winky.
 
No love for the guy in the plaster cast? That was funny as fuck his little polite quips.
 
Law Talkin’ Guy said:
Prime Video’s original shows and movies always seem to feature like 10X as much male nudity as female. I don’t know if it’s an agenda on the part of female and/or gay leadership within Amazon but it’s just cocks galore on Prime for some reason.
Click to expand...
This was HBO running gag to show many male penises amazon seems to be playing from their play book.
 
blaseblase said:
I watched it drunk and was fairly entertained. Conor was a cheesy villain and hammed it up but so was the original villain. Not exactly remaking a classic here. The only thing that would have made his role better would be if he had said "I used to fuck guys like you in high school".

The biggest issue was the lack of any sex scenes or female nudity. We got Conor's ass but zero nudity from any of the chicks? That's a crime against cheesy 80s movies. I also think making the owner of the roadhouse female didn't work because she was more attractive than the love interest and had more chemistry with the protagonist. Should've made her the love interest and added a sex scene.
Click to expand...

He should have gone with,

"I used to fuck bitches like you in bathroom stalls!"
 
TrueBias said:
Number 1, the original is not terrible. Silly story, but just about everything about it is an improvement over this pile of remade shit.

Number 2, the remake isnt fun. Its uncomfortable. Horrible acting with horrible lines is cringe city.

Number 3, a fucking dancer with a mullet did better fight scenes than an actual mma fighter.
Click to expand...


You've got some serious nostalgia glasses about the original. It is absolutely terrible. From concept to execution. It's glorious because it doesn't understand how god-awful it is.

And better fight scenes? Fucking stop it. Just stop. I think it's been quite some time since you've sat and watched the original.
 
tank666 said:
I give it 3 / 10. Jake Gylenhaal is pretty good as you would expect for such an accomplished actor. I did find his character pretty annoying sometimes. Connor looked like he was coked out of his mind every scene. That grin? Rest of the acting was shit maybe my age but had no idea who the fuck most of them were. At least Conor isn't a real actor to be fair.

The storyline was shit. As someone else said one minute it focuses on the terrible traumatic past of Jakes earlier life then seconds later some lame unfunny joke or scene happens. Even the fight scenes badly done as were all the fxs with stupid sped up scenes and crap cgi. Swayze must be turning in his grave. Really missed having a Sam Elliot character who was cool af in the original.

The original was stupid but still great fun and had some good acting and interesting characters. Great fight scenes, good / funny script. It knew what kind of movie it was. My god this remake makes the original look like Citizen Kane.
Click to expand...

I'm convinced they didn't give Conor a script. Just got him high/drunk AF then had the camera crew follow him around and record what happened. ;)
 
fingercuffs said:
No love for the guy in the plaster cast? That was funny as fuck his little polite quips.
Click to expand...

I thought that actor and the quick cutaway to Jake driving all those dudes to the hospital were among the good pieces of humor in the film. Don't really see too much to complain about. It's no classic but I thought it was reasonably entertaining and harked back to the day of old-school action films.
 
moreorless87 said:
To be fair I think the original always seemed quite aware it was very over the top and played it up to entertain and this film seems very much in the same kind of vein.

Again I think Gyllenhaal is by far the best thing here, he's never really had a blockbuster role in a truly great film to "launch" him but I think he has a load of charisma whilst still carrying some drama and this film plays very heavily on that indeed.

The rest of the film I think struggles a bit to live up to that, it does have a few quirky elements and Magnussen does make for a fun villian but otherwise it does feel a little prefunctionary for me.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with your assessment about the original. Literally I watched the movie again 2 days ago and I think many peope have some rose tint to their glasses. One of the reasons it's great is because it isn't self aware. It's legitimately trying to be a good movie and Swayze is playing his role with 100% conviction. That's actually one of the reasons it works because Swayze is still a charismatic, likable lead.

I agree that Gyllenhal is solid. I was actually an unfiltered Jake-Hater until Nightcrawler and the son of a bitch won me overbetween that and a couple other performances. He finds the perfect Zen for this role. The scene of him driving the bikers he just crushed to the hospital is pretty awesome.

Your last paragraph mentions fun, and that's really the only important thing here. If somebody goes into this movie sharpening their knives it can be eviscerated pretty easily. It's one of the movies thats sort of "critic-proof", like spoofy comedies or big budget action. It makes no attempt to win you over with any "serious film" elements. It's only goal is entertainment as long as, just like the original, you leave all sense of seriousness at the door.

It doesn't surprise me that the movie divides people. It's a "works for you or doesnt" kind of movie. What I am surprised about is how many people are propping up the original as something that it isn't. Because the original is absolute glorious trash.
 
Last edited:
KnightTemplar said:
I'm convinced they didn't give Conor a script. Just got him high/drunk AF then had the camera crew follow him around and record what happened. ;)
Click to expand...

When he was dancing with the woman at the Road House, it was reminiscent of the little dance he does with the bottles of Proper 12 in that promo. Guy definitely didn't have to stretch his abilities to appear in this movie. Yet I think he delivered what they wanted from him. Don't see a whole lot of potential for a future acting career for him (is Jardine the king of MMA fighters to solid character actors?) but I could certainly see him appearing as a heavy in some forthcoming Guy Ritchie movie.
 
Bob Gray said:
You've got some serious nostalgia glasses about the original. It is absolutely terrible. From concept to execution. It's glorious because it doesn't understand how god-awful it is.

And better fight scenes? Fucking stop it. Just stop. I think it's been quite some time since you've sat and watched the original.
Click to expand...
Damn, you really hate the original huh? Did the throat pulling gross you out? The blondes tits? Sam Elliots voice?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,112
Messages
55,538,552
Members
174,820
Latest member
Víctor Hugo Teco

Share this page

Back
Top