Instead of having remakes... - Blu-ray Forum

McCrutchy · 05-10-2010, 01:24 PM

So I've been thinking, and I came upon an idea that I don't think has really been tried here in the USA. The major impetus for this idea was seeing the remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street, which, regardless of whether you liked it or not, was nonetheless a remake of a movie that at the time of the remake's conception, was less than 25 years old. And what happened? The film was made, came out, was critically drubbed, and experienced a steep decline in it's second week because of the Summer tentpole Iron Man 2.

So here is my thought: When considering a remake of a more recent film, why not just re-release the original film, back into theaters, in a nationwide release, complete with new trailers and TV spots, as if it were a "new" movie?

What's most interesting is: that while a re-release is probably not going to net the same amount of box office receipts as a truly new remake, re-releasing the original would entirely eliminate the production costs of another film, so I would think that, if films were re-released wisely, profits could actually increase for some studios, especially in the horror genre, where remakes are often considered to be inferior, and many fans go out of their way to attend special re-releases anyway.

As far as I can tell, since the advent of home video, wide re-releases in the USA have been limited to WB classics, like the 1999 re-release of Gone with the Wind, or the "20th Anniversary Edition" of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, or classics that have been newly altered, like the original Star Wars trilogy in 1997 or The Exorcist in 2000, and I'd be really curious to see how, for instance, instead of re-booting Superman--again, WB simply restored the 1978 film and re-released that nationwide.

P@t_Mtl · 05-10-2010, 01:28 PM

Might work, I suppose a lot of fans of said movie would love the chance to see it on large screens again or maybe in certain cases for the first time as they might not have been old enough to see it in theaters the first time.

fatediesel · 05-10-2010, 01:37 PM

Whether or not you like the new Nightmare on Elm Street it is still a big success, bringing in almost $50 million in 2 weeks on a budget of $35 million, and it will bring in a lot more in home video sales/rental. If you tried to re-release a movie like the original Nightmare on Elm Street no mainstream theaters would show it. The profit potential just isn't there. There would be plenty of costs re-releasing it too. You'd have to make new prints of the movie, which for a wide release would be at least $5 million, and an ad campaign could be another $10 million. The odds of the studio or theater making a profit would be slim.

P@t_Mtl · 05-10-2010, 01:53 PM

I guess it depend's on the budget of said movie. I am guessing here that the budget for a horror movie (remake or not) is probably very low compare to remaking a Batman or a Star Trek movie.

dmb70 · 05-10-2010, 02:03 PM

About 4 years ago they did Re release Nightmare On Elm Street in theaters. I went & saw it with my then girlfriend. One thing I did notice is that it did feel a little dated, as much as we both liked it. Granted I don't think it got a wide release or a big media push either.

It would be cool to see classic movies get restorations & proper re releases though.

Gamma_Winstead · 05-10-2010, 02:05 PM

Because studios want NEW audiences. Releasing the original Nightmare today would be a disaster. It's a product of it's time. Same with this one.

SpaceDog · 05-10-2010, 04:59 PM

With home video being available in nearly 100% of households in the US, I would say that theatrical rerelease have a limited return. I have a theater nearby that runs prints every Wednesday for older films. While I don't tend to go because the prints are dated and beat up, this is probably the best we'll get as ther ROI for making new prints on a film that's readily available on DVD is likely not to be good.

I also take specific issue of the idea that just because there has been a great Superman movie that no further Superman films should be made. It's not like rebooting a comic franchise is the same as remake.

Also, keep in mind that the steep decline by Nightmare had far less to do with it's critical reception and far more to do with it being a horror movie. Lately horror movies open big and crash hard and fast.

Atreyu · 05-10-2010, 06:23 PM

Rereleasing some classics would be awesome but that rarely happens.
And why do they do remakes, for one reason only money. Money and nothing else.

Jezza · 05-10-2010, 07:07 PM

I have a feeling that we will see a few more re-releases in the near future because both Toy Story and Toy Story 2 were re-released in 3D last year and Beauty and the Beast is planned for a 3D release next year to mark its 20th anniversary. Now I don't think all the re-releases would be in 3D, but I do think because audiences are more aware of how movies are meant to be shown and they want to see them that way - on the BIG SCREEN.

Although I didn't go to see any of them, quite recently here in the UK my local cinema was showing a number of classic film such as The Wizard of Oz, Oliver Twist and Dr. No; and this was a major cinema, not some small one that shows poor quality versions.

So there is a chance of re-releases in the future as modern audiences do want to see classic movies on the big screen because they wouldn't have been born the first time they came out.

AKORIS · 05-10-2010, 07:12 PM

[
Also, keep in mind that the steep decline by Nightmare had far less to do with it's critical reception and far more to do with it being a horror movie. Lately horror movies open big and crash hard and fast.[/QUOTE]

horror films have almost always done that

EricJ · 05-10-2010, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

So I've been thinking, and I came upon an idea that I don't think has really been tried here in the USA. The major impetus for this idea was seeing the remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street, which, regardless of whether you liked it or not, was nonetheless a remake of a movie that at the time of the remake's conception, was less than 25 years old. And what happened?

New Line wanted to keep their Texas-Chainsaw franchise going, but, like the F13 remake, was limited to horror franchises the studio already owned.

Quote:

So here is my thought: When considering a remake of a more recent film, why not just re-release the original film, back into theaters, in a nationwide release, complete with new trailers and TV spots, as if it were a "new" movie?

They tried that, it flopped:
- During the '97-'98 craze for the Star Wars:SE films, Paramount thought any 20th-anniversary would attract 'Boomer audiences, re-released "Grease", and no one noticed. (It quickly mutated into the "Sing-along screening" craze, which was soon balkanized into gay-only audiences.)
- The Bible-belt push for re-releasing "The Passion" every year as a "tradition" self-destructed quickly when it only played 42 screens the second time around and died out in a week.

Quote:

As far as I can tell, since the advent of home video, wide re-releases in the USA have been limited to WB classics, like the 1999 re-release of Gone with the Wind, or the "20th Anniversary Edition" of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, or classics that have been newly altered, like the original Star Wars trilogy in 1997 or The Exorcist in 2000

Pretty much: Nowadays, the only times we see old movies "already out on disk" in theaters are when the studio wants to hype a new disk restoration (like with Disney or Warner's WOz), or during Oscar-nomination time for the movies we missed--Otherwise, the rule is, "No restored scenes, no ticket."

...It's the trade-off we've had to accept for having home-theater, and especially Blu-ray: It's hard enough to get audiences into theaters for NEW movies nowadays.

mikejet · 05-10-2010, 07:36 PM

I remember before the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood closed for renovations to become the ArcLight they showed classic 70mm prints of films. Not a lot of the shows were packed. Sucks.

SpaceDog · 05-10-2010, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKORIS

[
Also, keep in mind that the steep decline by Nightmare had far less to do with it's critical reception and far more to do with it being a horror movie. Lately horror movies open big and crash hard and fast.

horror films have almost always done that[/QUOTE]

Probably so, but I guess I didn't want to speak from authority when I don't have it. I will say that more creative horror entries tend to do well - Sixth Sense, Rosemary's Baby, The Exorcist, etc.

To the topic at hand, also keep in mind that Hollywood has **ALWAYS** been doing "remakes". Some of your favorite classic films are remakes including "Wizard of Oz" and "Ben Hur". Should we not have Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet because we already had Laurence Olivier?

I do agree that a lot of remakes feel like simple cash-ins (because they are) but saying that nothing should ever be remade is kind of naive.

EricJ · 05-10-2010, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

Should we not have Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet because we already had Laurence Olivier?

(No, we should not have had Kenneth Branagh's because we already had Mel Gibson, but that's another thread.)

Trogdor2010 · 05-10-2010, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricJ

...It's the trade-off we've had to accept for having home-theater, and especially Blu-ray: It's hard enough to get audiences into theaters for NEW movies nowadays.

That is why the best route is to go with a bright and good quality projector with a really big screen. I can't stand watching a movie on a small television even the really big ones. Plus you can avoid hostel idiots, drive by theater shootings (Don't ask me why, ok) and loud brats on their electronic devices when you want to watch the damn picture.

mpstjohn · 05-11-2010, 01:42 PM

Fathom Events was re-releasing old horror films for a while there. Alien. Halloween. Poltergeist.

They haven't done it for a few years though. Fewer and fewer people were going.

From all the re-releases I've gone to I do get a sense that there's a lot more profit to be found in remakes than re-releases. Especially with the Platinum Dunes movies, with a budget of 1-5 million, the difference between the gross of a re-release and a remake is a whole lot more than 5 million, so they'd be making more of a profit even counting in the expense of shooting a new film and marketing it.

I have less of a problem with Americans remaking American horror films, as long as its not in-name only and PG-13, than I do with Americans remaking foreign films (more likely to misinterpret the point the original filmmakers were trying to make...Kairo/Pulse for instance).

Suntory_Times · 05-11-2010, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

Also, keep in mind that the steep decline by Nightmare had far less to do with it's critical reception and far more to do with it being a horror movie. Lately horror movies open big and crash hard and fast.

That and Iron Man 2 bieng released didn't help one bit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clone Trooper

I have a feeling that we will see a few more re-releases in the near future because both Toy Story and Toy Story 2 were re-released in 3D last year and Beauty and the Beast is planned for a 3D release next year to mark its 20th anniversary.

Converting a 2d animation film (as in designed in 2d) to 3d doesn't really work and I doubt will be done. (Pixar's models are designed in 3d, the final image we saw was simply 2d. Beauty and the Beast was designed in 2d and the final appearance was 2d).

EricJ · 05-12-2010, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

That and Iron Man 2 bieng released didn't help one bit.

That, and deliberately releasing it one week before IM2 (can you say "Pre-summer cannon fodder"?) didn't help it any either.

Beaner666 · 05-12-2010, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

So here is my thought: When considering a remake of a more recent film, why not just re-release the original film, back into theaters, in a nationwide release, complete with new trailers and TV spots, as if it were a "new" movie?

... or The Exorcist in 2000

As you stated they did this with The Exorcist and it had less than stellar results. Horror movies are often a product of their times and don't always play well when re-released and often appear dated.

During The Exorcist's re-release I heard several stories of theaters full of laughing teens. A film that literally terrified one generation was a virtual laughing stock to another generation.

As much as I hate to admit it the studio's are actually better off remaking and updating older movies for newer audiences than simply re-releasing the original.

It sucks, I know.

kdo · 05-13-2010, 12:29 AM

I'm all for re-releasing the original films at the theaters and skipping the remakes

...of course, I highly doubt this will happen...

05-10-2010, 01:24 PM	#1
McCrutchy Contributor Top contributor Member since:Dec 2008 Location:East Coast, USA Home Theater Gallery:2 4K collection:1263 Blu-ray collection:6773 DVD collection:253 Blu-ray reviews: 5 Trading Score:17	Instead of having remakes... So I've been thinking, and I came upon an idea that I don't think has really been tried here in the USA. The major impetus for this idea was seeing the remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street, which, regardless of whether you liked it or not, was nonetheless a remake of a movie that at the time of the remake's conception, was less than 25 years old. And what happened? The film was made, came out, was critically drubbed, and experienced a steep decline in it's second week because of the Summer tentpole Iron Man 2. So here is my thought: When considering a remake of a more recent film, why not just re-release the original film, back into theaters, in a nationwide release, complete with new trailers and TV spots, as if it were a "new" movie? What's most interesting is: that while a re-release is probably not going to net the same amount of box office receipts as a truly new remake, re-releasing the original would entirely eliminate the production costs of another film, so I would think that, if films were re-released wisely, profits could actually increase for some studios, especially in the horror genre, where remakes are often considered to be inferior, and many fans go out of their way to attend special re-releases anyway. As far as I can tell, since the advent of home video, wide re-releases in the USA have been limited to WB classics, like the 1999 re-release of Gone with the Wind, or the "20th Anniversary Edition" of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, or classics that have been newly altered, like the original Star Wars trilogy in 1997 or The Exorcist in 2000, and I'd be really curious to see how, for instance, instead of re-booting Superman--again, WB simply restored the 1978 film and re-released that nationwide.

05-10-2010, 04:59 PM	#7
SpaceDog Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Jun 2007 Location:Raleigh, NC Blu-ray collection:116	With home video being available in nearly 100% of households in the US, I would say that theatrical rerelease have a limited return. I have a theater nearby that runs prints every Wednesday for older films. While I don't tend to go because the prints are dated and beat up, this is probably the best we'll get as ther ROI for making new prints on a film that's readily available on DVD is likely not to be good. I also take specific issue of the idea that just because there has been a great Superman movie that no further Superman films should be made. It's not like rebooting a comic franchise is the same as remake. Also, keep in mind that the steep decline by Nightmare had far less to do with it's critical reception and far more to do with it being a horror movie. Lately horror movies open big and crash hard and fast. Last edited by SpaceDog; 05-10-2010 at 05:02 PM.

05-13-2010, 12:29 AM	#20
kdo Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Mar 2010 Location:Realm of the Inoperative Data-Pushers Blu-ray reviews:540 Trading Score:1	I'm all for re-releasing the original films at the theaters and skipping the remakes...of course, I highly doubt this will happen...

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Remakes That Were Good	Movies	harrisonh	74	06-25-2012 03:10 AM
Americanized Remakes	Movies	Q?	47	12-08-2009 08:22 AM
The Remakes Era	Movies	djheadd	54	11-14-2009 09:07 PM
Remakes: Worse than They Once Were?	Movies	J_UNTITLED	43	01-24-2009 11:23 AM
How do you feel about remakes?	Movies	Crim122	46	11-13-2008 04:42 PM

05-10-2010, 01:28 PM	#2
P@t_Mtl Blu-ray Duke Member since:Sep 2008 Location:Montreal Home Theater Gallery:4 Blu-ray collection:452 DVD collection:513 Trading Score:3	Might work, I suppose a lot of fans of said movie would love the chance to see it on large screens again or maybe in certain cases for the first time as they might not have been old enough to see it in theaters the first time.

05-10-2010, 01:37 PM	#3
fatediesel Blu-ray Count Member since:Nov 2007 Location:Iowa Blu-ray collection:410 Trading Score:47	Whether or not you like the new Nightmare on Elm Street it is still a big success, bringing in almost $50 million in 2 weeks on a budget of $35 million, and it will bring in a lot more in home video sales/rental. If you tried to re-release a movie like the original Nightmare on Elm Street no mainstream theaters would show it. The profit potential just isn't there. There would be plenty of costs re-releasing it too. You'd have to make new prints of the movie, which for a wide release would be at least $5 million, and an ad campaign could be another $10 million. The odds of the studio or theater making a profit would be slim.

05-10-2010, 01:53 PM	#4
P@t_Mtl Blu-ray Duke Member since:Sep 2008 Location:Montreal Home Theater Gallery:4 Blu-ray collection:452 DVD collection:513 Trading Score:3	I guess it depend's on the budget of said movie. I am guessing here that the budget for a horror movie (remake or not) is probably very low compare to remaking a Batman or a Star Trek movie.

05-10-2010, 02:03 PM	#5
dmb70 Active Member Member since:Dec 2008 Blu-ray collection:43	About 4 years ago they did Re release Nightmare On Elm Street in theaters. I went & saw it with my then girlfriend. One thing I did notice is that it did feel a little dated, as much as we both liked it. Granted I don't think it got a wide release or a big media push either. It would be cool to see classic movies get restorations & proper re releases though.

05-10-2010, 02:05 PM	#6
Gamma_Winstead Blu-ray Prince Top contributor Member since:Jul 2007 Location:U.S.G. Ishimura 4K collection:118 Blu-ray collection:764 Blu-ray reviews: 36 Trading Score:6	Because studios want NEW audiences. Releasing the original Nightmare today would be a disaster. It's a product of it's time. Same with this one.

05-10-2010, 06:23 PM	#8
Atreyu Blu-ray Knight Member since:Dec 2008 Location:North Carolina 4K collection:370 Blu-ray collection:1876 DVD collection:619 Digital collection:1 Blu-ray reviews: 293 Trading Score:4	Rereleasing some classics would be awesome but that rarely happens. And why do they do remakes, for one reason only money. Money and nothing else.

05-10-2010, 07:07 PM	#9
Jezza Blu-ray Ninja Top contributor Member since:Apr 2010 4K collection:431 Blu-ray collection:820 DVD collection:36 Trading Score:1	I have a feeling that we will see a few more re-releases in the near future because both Toy Story and Toy Story 2 were re-released in 3D last year and Beauty and the Beast is planned for a 3D release next year to mark its 20th anniversary. Now I don't think all the re-releases would be in 3D, but I do think because audiences are more aware of how movies are meant to be shown and they want to see them that way - on the BIG SCREEN. Although I didn't go to see any of them, quite recently here in the UK my local cinema was showing a number of classic film such as The Wizard of Oz, Oliver Twist and Dr. No; and this was a major cinema, not some small one that shows poor quality versions. So there is a chance of re-releases in the future as modern audiences do want to see classic movies on the big screen because they wouldn't have been born the first time they came out.

05-10-2010, 07:12 PM	#10
AKORIS Blu-ray Prince Member since:Jul 2008 Location:Beautiful Pacific Northwest 4K collection:662 Blu-ray collection:3656 Blu-ray reviews:19	[ Also, keep in mind that the steep decline by Nightmare had far less to do with it's critical reception and far more to do with it being a horror movie. Lately horror movies open big and crash hard and fast.[/QUOTE] horror films have almost always done that

05-10-2010, 07:36 PM	#12
mikejet Banned Member since:Sep 2008 Location:Los Angeles, CA Blu-ray reviews:5 Trading Score:29	I remember before the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood closed for renovations to become the ArcLight they showed classic 70mm prints of films. Not a lot of the shows were packed. Sucks.

05-11-2010, 01:42 PM	#16
mpstjohn Blu-ray Guru Member since:Apr 2008 Location:Virginia Beach, VA Home Theater Gallery:30 4K collection:9 Blu-ray collection:463 DVD collection:225 Digital collection:273 Blu-ray reviews: 2 Trading Score:33	Fathom Events was re-releasing old horror films for a while there. Alien. Halloween. Poltergeist. They haven't done it for a few years though. Fewer and fewer people were going. From all the re-releases I've gone to I do get a sense that there's a lot more profit to be found in remakes than re-releases. Especially with the Platinum Dunes movies, with a budget of 1-5 million, the difference between the gross of a re-release and a remake is a whole lot more than 5 million, so they'd be making more of a profit even counting in the expense of shooting a new film and marketing it. I have less of a problem with Americans remaking American horror films, as long as its not in-name only and PG-13, than I do with Americans remaking foreign films (more likely to misinterpret the point the original filmmakers were trying to make...Kairo/Pulse for instance).

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals