Scarface (reboot)

[Damon1281]

Originally Posted by andantelise

I think you've completely missed the point of the film. It's supposed to represent excess in an excess-driven decade.Tony fits right in, except he doesn't, because he comes by his money illegally; while white collar crimes tend to be swept under the rug. He's supposed to be over the top, greedy, and ridiculous. Those are my two cents any way.

I see, the Evil Dead II of crime movies. Doesn't make it better for me and I never knew anyone that liked the movie. Of course, here, had to be a different story. So do you think a remake will duplicate that aspect, assuming the unlikely event it will be made?

[-JKR-]

Originally Posted by Damon1281

I see, the Evil Dead II of crime movies. Doesn't make it better for me and I never knew anyone that liked the movie.

Know plenty of people who like the movie, not even counting movie fans/aficionados.

[montana666]

Originally Posted by -JKR-

Know plenty of people who like the movie, not even counting movie fans/aficionados.

I didn't even know there were people who don't like "Scarface". Since I saw it in the cinema back then, it has not lost any of its fascination. I've probably seen it 40 times.

[Zivouhr]

A remake? Not necessary IMO. The original holds up fine.

The original Scarface is on TubiTv in the US for a limited time free to watch. I always caught the end on TV, but only now finally watched the whole movie.

Very well told story of Tony Motana aka Scarface, though he was never addressed as Scarface once in the film, other than an agent asking how he got his scar on his face in the beginning of the film.


Some SPOILERS:
The movie covered a lot of the questions I had by the end of the film if not all of them, so good job there as well as giving Tony some depth as a criminal hungry for power and money. Near the end of the film, Tony's freedom is on the line. His lawyer cannot keep him from eventually going to jail for at least 3 years, but his Bolivian connections say they can keep him out of jail if he can follow through on eliminating a TV reporter in NYC. Tony agrees, but when he sees the reporter get into the rigged car not alone, but with his family, the choice he makes to sacrifice his guaranteed freedom to spare the family and go to war over it, says a lot about his value for family.

He's 95% corrupt and evil, but has some heart in there on his self-destructive path. I also like how later in the film while eating dinner with his wife and friend, how empty power, money and an addicted wife can be. He said he's working hard for nothing pretty much. The camera zooms in on his expression of a blank, depressed face later on. Good stuff.

Scarface is a good addition to tragic mafia/mob/crime organization themed films like Goodfellas, Casino, Heat, Godfather, Donnie Brasco, etc.

[Jay H.]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

A remake? Not necessary IMO. The original holds up fine.

Are you referring to the one that was released in 1932?

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

Are you referring to the one that was released in 1932?

Thanks, I forgot about the original original 1932 film, which I haven't seen yet but heard about. The 1983 Scarface with Pacino is the one. But yeah, that's something how many remakes of remakes of remakes there can be in the movie realm.

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

A remake? Not necessary IMO. The original holds up fine.

The original Scarface

[Show spoiler]is on TubiTv in the US for a limited time free to watch. I always caught the end on TV, but only now finally watched the whole movie.

Very well told story of Tony Motana aka Scarface, though he was never addressed as Scarface once in the film, other than an agent asking how he got his scar on his face in the beginning of the film.


Some SPOILERS:
The movie covered a lot of the questions I had by the end of the film if not all of them, so good job there as well as giving Tony some depth as a criminal hungry for power and money. Near the end of the film, Tony's freedom is on the line. His lawyer cannot keep him from eventually going to jail for at least 3 years, but his Bolivian connections say they can keep him out of jail if he can follow through on eliminating a TV reporter in NYC. Tony agrees, but when he sees the reporter get into the rigged car not alone, but with his family, the choice he makes to sacrifice his guaranteed freedom to spare the family and go to war over it, says a lot about his value for family.

He's 95% corrupt and evil, but has some heart in there on his self-destructive path. I also like how later in the film while eating dinner with his wife and friend, how empty power, money and an addicted wife can be. He said he's working hard for nothing pretty much. The camera zooms in on his expression of a blank, depressed face later on. Good stuff.

Scarface is a good addition to tragic mafia/mob/crime organization themed films like Goodfellas, Casino, Heat, Godfather, Donnie Brasco, etc.

Original:



Remake:

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Thanks, I forgot about the original original 1932 film, which I haven't seen yet but heard about. The 1983 Scarface with Pacino is the one. But yeah, that's something how many remakes of remakes of remakes there can be in the movie realm.

You say the ‘83 one is the best one but also say you haven’t seen the ‘32 one. I guess Im crazy in not wanting to declare an opinion about a movie before I’ve seen it. I try to go in fresh and not prejudge it.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

Original:

[Show spoiler]

Remake:

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

You say the ‘83 one is the best one but also say you haven’t seen the ‘32 one. I guess Im crazy in not wanting to declare an opinion about a movie before I’ve seen it. I try to go in fresh and not prejudge it.

I mentioned a remake wasn't necessary based on the Pacino film, but honestly forgot about the original film, and admit I haven't seen it. And I agree, I cannot say this is the best until I see that one, and wouldn't say it's the best until I see it.

How did you like the original vs the 83 version?

[Warm Gun]

Like the remake more. In the original they went out of their way to make the character scared and pathetic at the end as a message against organized crime at the time.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Thanks, I forgot about the original original 1932 film, which I haven't seen yet but heard about. The 1983 Scarface with Pacino is the one. But yeah, that's something how many remakes of remakes of remakes there can be in the movie realm.

How many people actually knew about the 1932 film? My guess is not many, including you and I! If you mention that film title to the general public, I’d say 998 out of 1,000 would think of the 1983 version. Same for the wizard of Oz which although some alleged version existed in the 17th century or something, LOL, the Judy garland version IS the Wizard of Oz for all intent and purposes.

Technically, there are a lot of remakes that many of us don’t know about. But there’s a reason for that. The original or whatever isn’t that good or memorable. It didn’t endure. It didn’t have any staying power. Or it’s just too old. So, a better version takes its place. That’s how this works, sometimes.

[Monterey Jack]

It pisses me off how so many dismiss the 1932 version, when it's a FANTASTIC movie.

SCARFACE (1932) - Nightclub Scene - YouTube

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

It pisses me off how so many dismiss the 1932 version, when it's a FANTASTIC movie.

SCARFACE (1932) - Nightclub Scene - YouTube

Unfortunately some people can’t handle movies in black & White and made before the 80’s.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

How many people actually knew about the 1932 film? My guess is not many, including you and I! If you mention that film title to the general public, I’d say 998 out of 1,000 would think of the 1983 version. Same for the wizard of Oz which although some alleged version existed in the 17th century or something, LOL, the Judy garland version IS the Wizard of Oz for all intent and purposes.

Technically, there are a lot of remakes that many of us don’t know about. But there’s a reason for that. The original or whatever isn’t that good or memorable. It didn’t endure. It didn’t have any staying power. Or it’s just too old. So, a better version takes its place. That’s how this works, sometimes.

That's true, there are so many remakes these days, that it's not always apparent when it happens since the original might be not very well known to most. In all my years of hearing about Scarface the movie, it's always been the Pacino version.

I can understand making a remake of an older era film.
With the 1980s version, it's almost 50 years, so that's understandable too. In this case, black&white, and now a full-color film.
Sometimes recent remakes can make sense if the original version was in a different language, and the newer remake adapts it for a new audience in a new language.

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

It pisses me off how so many dismiss the 1932 version, when it's a FANTASTIC movie.

SCARFACE (1932) - Nightclub Scene - YouTube

Thanks. That actually looks interesting. I watch older era movies too, so I'll check it out eventually down the road. Thanks.

[ij72]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

It pisses me off how so many dismiss the 1932 version, when it's a FANTASTIC movie.

Yeah, that Howard Hawks guy knew a few things about making movies...

[Poya]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

Are you referring to the one that was released in 1932?

News Flash: Both are based on a book. Each movie's an adaptation. There are no remakes.

[ij72]

Originally Posted by Poya

News Flash: Both are based on a book. Each movie's an adaptation. There are no remakes.

Did Oliver Stone ever even read the book?

All the stuff I had seen said DePalma/Pacino/Stone were all coming to this from familiarity with Hawks' movie, not the book.