Remakes: Worse than They Once Were?

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

"28 Days Later" is not a zombie film -- it is viral horror with still living and breathing human beings succumbing to a virus (i.e. they are not the walking or running dead). Danny Boyle and Co. have stated this many times and yet it never seems to get through to most.

Zombies need not be literally undead. The concept of them merely being infected is a much more plausible take on the idea which requires less suspension of scientific disbelief.

That aside aside, I have to agree absolutely with the closing remarks, even if I don't agree absolutely with the way he got to the point. People complain about remakes too much. If you don't like the idea of the studio "raping" your favorite classic film, just don't see the remake. It's that easy. Just pretend it doesn't exist and avoid the topic of the discussion altogether. Don't bring up the topic so you can ***** about how much it sucks, ESPECIALLY if the movie isn't even out yet.

Note: the same ideal I have here also applies for movies based on other media (such as books or TV) and also unnecessary sequels.

[assydingo]

People tend to think all remakes are cash-ins. Some may be but others are genuine efforts.

People should make a distinction between remakes and movies that take the source and make their own story of it.

One example is Charlie and The Chocolate Factory. It's obvious that Johnny Depp isn't playing the same Wonka as Gene Wilder. Another example is Hairspray.

[P@t_Mtl]

Sometimes a remake can be as fun or better then the original. IMO I think Miracle On 34th Street version 1996 is more fun then the 1947 one. Way better then the 1973 one for sure.

[Crim122]

Only good remake I have seen is The Thing.

Rob Zombies Halloween, though it was a reimage was decent at best...not terrible though.

[J_UNTITLED]

Originally Posted by Crim122

Rob Zombies Halloween, though it was a reimage was decent at best...not terrible though.

Agree to disagree on that.

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

Agree to disagree on that.

In what aspect(just wondering)? I mean there was plenty I hated about it, but I think it could have been far worse.

[Ator the Invincible]

Originally Posted by Crim122

Rob Zombies Halloween, though it was a reimage was decent at best...not terrible though.

The Halloween remake was one of those situations where a lot of people were going to hate it regardless of quality. The original is simply too classic and beloved. That said, I'm actually glad Zombie's back for the sequel. I want to see what he can do with a completely original Michael Myers story, no retreads.

As for remakes in general, well, people tend to lump them all together. It just doesn't work though. They're no different than any other movie. Some suck, some are great, but most tend to just be mediocre time wasters. You need to judge each film individually. They really need to stop remaking movies from the 80's though. Way, way, way too soon.

[J_UNTITLED]

Originally Posted by Crim122

In what aspect(just wondering)? I mean there was plenty I hated about it, but I think it could have been far worse.

Aside from perhaps the way the infamous mask was designed and turned out, there is absolutely nothing about the movie that I think works or is successful... at all. He made almost every character yet another white-trash-trailer-park of a cliché and turned Michael Myers into yet another abused, mentally-undone and easily-explained serial killer.


Not a fan of any of it.

[mikem471]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

Aside from perhaps the way the infamous mask was designed and turned out, there is absolutely nothing about the movie that I think works or is successful... at all. He made almost every character yet another white-trash-trailer-park of a cliché and turned Michael Myers into yet another abused, mentally-undone and easily-explained serial killer.


Not a fan of any of it.

"Easily-explained" is at least SOME explanation on why he acted the way he did, something the original didn't give.

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

Aside from perhaps the way the infamous mask was designed and turned out, there is absolutely nothing about the movie that I think works or is successful... at all. He made almost every character yet another white-trash-trailer-park of a cliché and turned Michael Myers into yet another abused, mentally-undone and easily-explained serial killer.


Not a fan of any of it.

Yeah didnt like any of that, and I didnt like how there was no suspense.

Originally Posted by Ator the Invincible

The Halloween remake was one of those situations where a lot of people were going to hate it regardless of quality. The original is simply too classic and beloved. That said, I'm actually glad Zombie's back for the sequel. I want to see what he can do with a completely original Michael Myers story, no retreads.

As for remakes in general, well, people tend to lump them all together. It just doesn't work though. They're no different than any other movie. Some suck, some are great, but most tend to just be mediocre time wasters. You need to judge each film individually. They really need to stop remaking movies from the 80's though. Way, way, way too soon.

And foreign horror flicks that get remade before the original is even released.

[nick1091]

Originally Posted by Ator the Invincible

As for remakes in general, well, people tend to lump them all together. It just doesn't work though. They're no different than any other movie. Some suck, some are great, but most tend to just be mediocre time wasters. You need to judge each film individually.

This hit the nail on the head.

I think what people fail to put in context is that so many of the movies made very year are derivative of something, whether it be a novel, comic book, play, etc. There are people who clamor for books from their favorite authors to be made into films, but if a favorite film is being remade, it is an obvious raping of their childhood and can in no way be any good. Is it just because there is already a visual precedent set as opposed to written works?

I will say that I don't mind the idea of a remake necessarily if someone feels earnestly that there is something they can do to improve on it, be it advanced special effects, editing, etc. I do, however, strenously object to a complete aping of the original (the Psycho shot-for-shot remake was utterly pointless) or if it's just a blatant cash grab. Everything else I'm willing to look at on a case by case basis.

[TripAcez]

Ill probably get slammed for this but i DEFINITELY enjoyed The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake over the original..the part that killed the original to me was at the dinner table...i swear i was forced to listen to someone screaming for 5-10 min it just took away and was not scary..the remake was better imo

[gino]

I may be the only one here but I think Dawn of the Dead (remake) is better than the original.

[thedarkangel1975]

Originally Posted by TripAcez

Ill probably get slammed for this but i DEFINITELY enjoyed The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake over the original..the part that killed the original to me was at the dinner table...i swear i was forced to listen to someone screaming for 5-10 min it just took away and was not scary..the remake was better imo

+1 I agree totally. I was bored with the original.

[andyman1970]

Remakes, especially in the horror genre can go either way. Good remakes IMO are The Thing, The Hills Have Eyes and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre for example. Examples of bad remakes would be Halloween, Black Christmas and Amittyville Horror

[assydingo]

Another remake I liked better is A Little Princess. I just can't get into Shirley Temple's acting in the original. Liesel Matthews is way better to me and it also has the kick ass fantasy scenes in India.

[opterasis]

Originally Posted by andyman1970

Remakes, especially in the horror genre can go either way. Good remakes IMO are The Thing, The Hills Have Eyes and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre for example. Examples of bad remakes would be Halloween, Black Christmas and Amittyville Horror

+1. I happen to think the My Bloody Valentine Remake was just as good as the original, if not better due to the 3d.

[John Dorian]

Originally Posted by assydingo

One example is Charlie and The Chocolate Factory. It's obvious that Johnny Depp isn't playing the same Wonka as Gene Wilder. Another example is Hairspray.

I''ve always thought Johnny Depp did a FANTASTIC Willy Wonka. I like the remake better than the original.

[Blu Man]

Some remakes are great. Some arn't so hot. But I don't think that people should count a movie out just because it's a remake.

[hoogoosedmoose41]

ill probably get flamed here but is it so darned hard for hollywood to come up with something new than all the friggin remakes jeez. it seems like thats all there is ... probably 10 years from now they will be remaking the lord of the rings.