What is the point of remakes?

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Farerb

Because you always talk about numbers and data.

Ah - OK. Yes - those are examples of remakes that hit it out of the park. Then we have the flops:

The Wolfman (2010), Alfie (2004), Ben-Hur (2016) & The Mummy (2017) just to name a few.

[SilverFox84]

Was The Mummy a remake? It's completely different the only thing that's the same is the title

[spaceball-one]

The real question to me is when are we finally gonna get the friggin' Logan's Run remake?
If anything deserves a remake, it's that.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by SilverFox84

Was The Mummy a remake? It's completely different the only thing that's the same is the title

It (and the 1999 version) are different takes of the franchise that began with the 1932 film. Since it's the same IP owned by Universal all these years, it's probably more accurate to call them all reboots, but reboots are a type of remake.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by spaceball-one

The real question to me is when are we finally gonna get the friggin' Logan's Run remake?
If anything deserves a remake, it's that.

In the mid-1990s, Warner Bros. began development of a remake.[59] In 2000, ideas for a film remake centred on a more faithful adaptation of the novel, restoring Crazy Horse Mountain and the sky gypsies.[59] In August 2010, Nolan confirmed that the long-awaited Warner Bros. remake would be on production in 2010–2011 and that producer Joel Silver announced that it [would] be shot in 3-D, and that Carl Rinsch [would] direct from a screenplay ([then still] in progress) from writer Alex Garland. The death age would be lowered to 21 to match the novel and the film would be much closer to the original book.[60] However, as of 2018, the film was still in pre-production.[61]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%..._(film)#Legacy

[Zivouhr]

What movie would you like to see remade with improvements?

There are some original films that had good concepts, but maybe the execution of the idea in the film was off. It's even possible the original film's creators missed the mark of what the concept was all about.

And instead of only remaking an entire film, what about re-editing certain films?

Like Taken 2 and 3 from Megaton the director who loves to showcase 100 cuts per every 10 seconds? Instead, hand it to a different editor and let the film's footage actually breathe. Those could've been better films with better editing.
I'd say the same thing about Paul WS Anderson's Resident Evil The Final Chapter. What a mess of fast cuts. It made the fight/actions almost unwatchable. Rapid fire editing stinks for most fight scenes. Slow it down to at most 1 shot per second, not 2 or 3 shots per second.

Same with the choppy as all hell fight scenes in a Jason Bourne film, the last one I think that Damon was in. The fight scenes were very difficult to tell what was going on for the several minutes the fight lasted. Not good, so re-edit them. But if there isn't any good footage, then there's not much hope.

And finally, if the studio/owner that released the film wants to just sit on the original cut, then there's nothing that can be done.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by spaceball-one

The real question to me is when are we finally gonna get the friggin' Logan's Run remake?
If anything deserves a remake, it's that.

Logan's Run was bad?

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

What movie would you like to see remade with improvements?

There are some original films that had good concepts, but maybe the execution of the idea in the film was off. It's even possible the original film's creators missed the mark of what the concept was all about.

And instead of only remaking an entire film, what about re-editing certain films?

Like Taken 2 and 3 from Megaton the director who loves to showcase 100 cuts per every 10 seconds? Instead, hand it to a different editor and let the film's footage actually breathe. Those could've been better films with better editing.
I'd say the same thing about Paul WS Anderson's Resident Evil The Final Chapter. What a mess of fast cuts. It made the fight/actions almost unwatchable. Rapid fire editing stinks for most fight scenes. Slow it down to at most 1 shot per second, not 2 or 3 shots per second.

Same with the choppy as all hell fight scenes in a Jason Bourne film, the last one I think that Damon was in. The fight scenes were very difficult to tell what was going on for the several minutes the fight lasted. Not good, so re-edit them. But if there isn't any good footage, then there's not much hope.

And finally, if the studio/owner that released the film wants to just sit on the original cut, then there's nothing that can be done.

As I recall from the DVD bonus features, Matt Damon confessed that he just didn't take with the fight training and likened how he learned the choreography to dancing. This might mean that there is no good footage. I hope that there is though, and it's a major pet peeve of mine how Paul Greengrass ruined the last ~20 years of action films with his shaky cam and spastic editing full of choppy quick cuts.

Frankly he should be given at least partial directing credit for Quantum of Solace as that infamous opening car chase might as well have been directed by him.

I would agree with any action film that has spastic editing of its fights being remade, though only so far as to incorporate the existing good footage. I wouldn't want a full remake with all the modern tropes (and different actors).

[BudBaxter]

Originally Posted by spaceball-one

The real question to me is when are we finally gonna get the friggin' Logan's Run remake?
If anything deserves a remake, it's that.

Michael Bay already did it. It was called The Island.

[Zombo]

Personally, I don't mind remakes. Although, some do flat out bomb. I was looking forward to The Craft remake and I can't even. I would love to see a remake of Big Trouble in Little China, despite being a die hard fan of the original.

Something like Indiana Jones would be cool if it was a new story while he was younger. Harrison IS Indiana Jones, but the franchise stalls out with his age and the timeline in his films. There are so many cool adventures that could've been explored on screen when the character was younger. Fate of Atlantis or Seven Veils for example.

I do think there are tons of books, tv shows, comic books, hell even cartoons that would make cool films that remain untouched. Hollywood needs to focus on new content more than they do on remakes. In a time when the economy is so erratic, I believe it's just easier to attempt to improve or rewrite something than it is to flat out write a new screen play, script, etc. They should take more time to get remakes right ( meaning new tech, appeal to both original and new viewers, show proper homage to the original while expanding and updating ) and concentrate on new untapped content instead.

[mastadge]

Originally Posted by Smovies

my question is, why do we expect/demand remakes to be 100% faithful to the source material

We don't?