The movie was kinda good it felt like just a funny parody of this show i mean the beavers dressing like it the 1960's even tho its the 1990's lol, why do you think this movie sucks ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtywYznZnTI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I79lbWQgT5o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMGZHT6RwmM

It was awful simply because it was modernized and the Cleaver family lived in the 90's instead of the 50's and 60's. IMO, it was a complete waste to do a movie of a classic show when they didn't even set it in the correct era. It was a slap in the face to the real show.

It is very hard to re-create a "classic" be it a TV show or motion picture. I think that's particularly true when the original is still available for viewing.

I've seen both some of the "Leave It to Beaver" TV series and the movie. I don't think the movie was all that bad myself- but it's certainly not the greatest movie version of a TV series either. (Which is a very small list, as far as I'm concerned.)
There were some things in the movie that I could not picture happening in the original TV series- but then, I suppose people probably also had the same reactions to "The New Leave It to Beaver" series that ran on the Disney Channel in the '80s. That series was probably more disturbing than the movie in some ways.

It was awful simply because it was modernized and the Cleaver family lived in the 90's instead of the 50's and 60's. IMO, it was a complete waste to do a movie of a classic show when they didn't even set it in the correct era. It was a slap in the face to the real show.

It's weird not to agree with you because I usually do. I liked the '97 film and thought it weaved some classic eps into the plot nicely. So I didn't see it as a slap in the face, but rather as a nice tribute. On the other hand, it wasn't as good as the real deal, which I have been watching greedily on my burned DVD's from Antenna. MY only regret is I didn't burn every ep of LITB but I probably have half (117).

It's weird not to agree with you because I usually do. I liked the '97 film and thought it weaved some classic eps into the plot nicely. So I didn't see it as a slap in the face, but rather as a nice tribute. On the other hand, it wasn't as good as the real deal, which I have been watching greedily on my burned DVD's from Antenna. MY only regret is I didn't burn every ep of LITB but I probably have half (117).

No worries, we can't afree on everything and that's what makes us human, right? It just all boils down to what people accept and they won't. I have never accepted any remake of classics because IMO, you can't. To me a classic actor or actress who performed in a certain role was custom fit (in most cases) so to me, any recast is wrong. Maybe I was harsh when I said it was a slap in the face but I was disappointed that's all. And I can't stand the actor who protrayed Ward, but then again, they wouldn't have gotten that right anyway because Hugh was irreplaceable and so was Barbara.

No worries, we can't afree on everything and that's what makes us human, right? It just all boils down to what people accept and they won't. I have never accepted any remake of classics because IMO, you can't. To me a classic actor or actress who performed in a certain role was custom fit (in most cases) so to me, any recast is wrong. Maybe I was harsh when I said it was a slap in the face but I was disappointed that's all. And I can't stand the actor who protrayed Ward, but then again, they wouldn't have gotten that right anyway because Hugh was irreplaceable and so was Barbara.


Many remakes do fall flat, so I can see your point. For example, I thought the Bewtched movie was God-awful.

Hugh Beaumont was dead, and Ward was a big part of the series dynamic. Barbara Billingsley had to take up the role of both parents. If Hugh Beaumont were still alive, it might have worked.

I didn't hate it, but to me it felt like the writers never watched the original show in depth, but just picked a bunch of episodes they heard were iconic.
Same with the characters, they picked their obvious characteristics, and left everything else out. So we got a Larry who only pigged out, and a Ward who was an over exaggerated cartoon version of Hugh's performance- yes Ward got mad in the original, but he didn't blow his top like in the movie.

Not all remakes of TV shows are bad, The Fugitive is excellent, as are the first 2 Addams Family movies.

l just watched the trailer, thats enough for me.
l don't want to watch the full movie.

It was awful simply because it was modernized and the Cleaver family lived in the 90's instead of the 50's and 60's. IMO, it was a complete waste to do a movie of a classic show when they didn't even set it in the correct era. It was a slap in the face to the real show.

They Couldn't Decide What they Wanted To Do With This Movie! (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119509/board/flat/166668818?p=1):
Parts of this movie seem exactly like the TV show: Beaver & Wally wear clothing styles right out of the 1950s, they are basically good kids who get into mischief, and they have loving parents.

Parts of this movie seem like they were going for parody: Wally about to say "ass" to his parents, Mrs. Cleaver telling Eddie to "cut the crap", and Wally playing "spin the bottle".

Parts of this movie seem like they were attempting to modernize "Leave It To Beaver": Mrs. Cleaver exposing her midriff while working in her garden, Beaver getting a computer from Aunt Martha, Ward & June watching "Home Improvement", and Gilbert now a black kid who speaks in Ebonics.

I didn't hate it, but to me it felt like the writers never watched the original show in depth, but just picked a bunch of episodes they heard were iconic.
Same with the characters, they picked their obvious characteristics, and left everything else out. So we got a Larry who only pigged out, and a Ward who was an over exaggerated cartoon version of Hugh's performance- yes Ward got mad in the original, but he didn't blow his top like in the movie.

Not all remakes of TV shows are bad, The Fugitive is excellent, as are the first 2 Addams Family movies.
I'm glad I never saw that. I loved the remakes of The Fugitive and The Addams Family and are so far the only ones I have.

I didn't hate it, but to me it felt like the writers never watched the original show in depth, but just picked a bunch of episodes they heard were iconic.
Same with the characters, they picked their obvious characteristics, and left everything else out. So we got a Larry who only pigged out, and a Ward who was an over exaggerated cartoon version of Hugh's performance- yes Ward got mad in the original, but he didn't blow his top like in the movie.

Not all remakes of TV shows are bad, The Fugitive is excellent, as are the first 2 Addams Family movies.
I'm glad I never saw that. I loved the remakes of The Fugitive and The Addams Family and are so far the only ones I have.

The movie was kinda good it felt like just a funny parody of this show i mean the beavers dressing like it the 1960's even tho its the 1990's lol, why do you think this movie sucks ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtywYznZnTI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I79lbWQgT5o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMGZHT6RwmM

I liked the beginning as it places a closure to 1960 with beaver coming home. The same characterization was not effective.

Perhaps they could have done what the Brady Bunch movie did Would have been more entertaining.

Hugh Beaumont was dead, and Ward was a big part of the series dynamic. Barbara Billingsley had to take up the role of both parents. If Hugh Beaumont were still alive, it might have worked.

There seems to be some confusion about what movie we're talking about.

It seems that the original poster meant the 1997 theatrical movie Leave It to Beaver.

In addition, there was the 1983 TV movie Still the Beaver, in which Jerry Mathers and Tony Dow played the Beaver and Wally roles as adults. This seems to be what you're talking about, as Hugh Beaumont died in 1982 and Barbara Billingsley still played June.



Parts of this movie seem like they were going for parody: Wally about to say "ass" to his parents, Mrs. Cleaver telling Eddie to "cut the crap", and Wally playing "spin the bottle".


This exactly.

To me, that kind of language, which they didn't use on 1950s TV, made the movie not authentic.

And both Jerry Mathers and Tony Dow declined to appear; Jerry in an interview said something to the effect that it wasn't Leave It to Beaver.

Yeah I was confused about which movie we were talking about. I wouldn't even consider 1997 Leave It To Beaver as it would not be anything like the show. Just like that movie Dennis The Menace with Matthau. Love Matthau but no one can play Dennis Mitchell except North. Anyway I liked parts of Still The Beaver as we get to see Jerry, Tony, Barbara, Ken, Frank ,Richard and even Rusty Stevens all grown up. I never even watched the new LITB series.

They Couldn't Decide What they Wanted To Do With This Movie! (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119509/board/flat/166668818?p=1):
* Parts of this movie seem exactly like the TV show: Beaver & Wally wear clothing styles right out of the 1950's, they are basically good kids who get into mischief, and they have loving parents.

* Parts of this movie seem like they were going for parody: Wally about to say "ass" to his parents, Mrs. Cleaver telling Eddie to "cut the crap", and Wally playing "spin the bottle".

* Parts of this movie seem like they were attempting to modernize "Leave It To Beaver": Mrs. Cleaver exposing her midriff while working in her garden, Beaver getting a computer from Aunt Martha, Ward & June watching "Home Improvement", and Gilbert now a black kid who speaks in ebonics.

Eddie's clothes looked like the 1970's.