|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 7, 2013 14:13:43 GMT -5
Now I am sure most of us can't stand most of the remakes that Hollywood keep churning out, but is there a case for SOME remakes?
I don't mind a remake if it's for a movie that never really had an audience the first time around. As much as I love Phantom Of The Paradise - it might be interesting to see a remake assuming the right director was behind it.
Are you across the board against remakes or are you OK with some based on whatever your criteria is?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tookie on Apr 7, 2013 14:33:47 GMT -5
I guess it depends on the film. I'd never want to see a remake of something like Rocky, but I'd love to see a remake of Jaws, or even something like Death Wish. The last remake I can remember seeing was Arthur, and I really enjoyed it (even though it wasnt exactly a success).
|
|
|
|
Post by lugnut on Apr 7, 2013 14:36:27 GMT -5
Some, sure, but my problem is not with remakes themselves but with what they're remaking. Most of the stuff they're choosing was fine the first time around. I'd rather see them take a movie that had an interesting concept but maybe didn't entirely work as well as it should have on the first go, and it's not like there's any shortage of these... but they usually don't have the "name recognition" value that the others did, so nobody bothers.
I suppose it doesn't matter much since it doesn't seem like any of the recent remakes have really yet taken precedence over the originals, and I haven't even watched most of them myself, but it all seems rather pointless. They might make enough money up-front to justify it, but I can't imagine many of them continuing to have catalog value down the road the way the originals have proven to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by B5Erik on Apr 7, 2013 15:41:45 GMT -5
I don't mind a remake - as long as it's good.
Some movies, though, would never need a remake. Forbidden Planet, for example. Sure, the effects could be modernized, as well as the outfits and SOME of the dialogue, but the essence of the movie would be changed, and no matter what they did a remake would be inferior to the original.
|
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 7, 2013 17:21:35 GMT -5
I think it's lazy and excuses unoriginality in Hollywood. There is no point in remaking what are often considered genre classics, especially. That's not to say it's never eventful or ultimately fruitful, but most times the result is far worse than the original films and often made by utter hacks in the industry. A true directoral talent might have something to say, but that's largely not who's making these butcher jobs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 7, 2013 17:22:42 GMT -5
I guess it depends on the film. I'd never want to see a remake of something like Rocky, but I'd love to see a remake of Jaws, or even something like Death Wish. The last remake I can remember seeing was Arthur, and I really enjoyed it (even though it wasnt exactly a success). You take it back right this instant! Death Wish is fucking perfection! |
|
|
|
Post by Tookie on Apr 7, 2013 17:34:19 GMT -5
I guess it depends on the film. I'd never want to see a remake of something like Rocky, but I'd love to see a remake of Jaws, or even something like Death Wish. The last remake I can remember seeing was Arthur, and I really enjoyed it (even though it wasnt exactly a success). You take it back right this instant! Death Wish is fucking perfection! It is, and I love it. I wouldnt want it remade because I thought it could be better, but because I love the story and would love to see a more contemporary version of it. Nobody can replace Bronson!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 17:35:18 GMT -5
I guess it depends on the film. I'd never want to see a remake of something like Rocky, but I'd love to see a remake of Jaws, or even something like Death Wish. The last remake I can remember seeing was Arthur, and I really enjoyed it (even though it wasnt exactly a success). You take it back right this instant! Death Wish is fucking perfection! They got it perfect by the second sequel, for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 7, 2013 17:49:15 GMT -5
I know they'd stick it with that stupid "Platinum Dunes" company that Michael Bay runs and I'd wanna kill myself. So long as Michael Bay is kept away from my favorite franchises I'm happy. *pouts about the death of his teenage mutant ninja turtles*
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 20:16:58 GMT -5
It depends on the quality of the film. 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' is an example of a good remake.
|
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 7, 2013 21:45:05 GMT -5
Wasn't that a prequel really?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 7, 2013 21:55:50 GMT -5
Yep, supposed to be part of the same continuity of the real series, not that Burton piece of shit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 22:39:15 GMT -5
Wasn't that a prequel really? Yep, supposed to be part of the same continuity of the real series, not that Burton piece of shit. No, it's a remake. "This is part of the mythology and it should be seen as that. It's not a continuation of the other films; it's an original story. It does satisfy the people who enjoy those films. The point of this film is to achieve that and to bring that fan base into this film exactly like 'Batman [Begins].'" It has a similar premise to 'Conquest of the Planet of the Apes' but it doesn't fit into the series' continuity. |
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 7, 2013 23:18:24 GMT -5
I think it's lazy and excuses unoriginality in Hollywood. There is no point in remaking what are often considered genre classics, especially. Exactly. It's like re-recording a classic album. It's almost always a major dud. There are many movie remakes that were better than the original. |
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 7, 2013 23:52:19 GMT -5
There are many movie remakes that were better than the original. I find most to be the opposite. Yes most - but there are many examples of remakes that were better than the original. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Apr 8, 2013 0:44:52 GMT -5
I loathe, despise and abhor American remakes of British and foreign language films or TV shows. They don't get it and I wish they'd stop trying.
Christopher Nolan's version of Insomnia may be the exception, but I haven't seen the Norwegian original to compare.
|
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 6:50:38 GMT -5
I loathe, despise and abhor American remakes of British and foreign language films or TV shows. They don't get it and I wish they'd stop trying. Christopher Nolan's version of Insomnia may be the exception, but I haven't seen the Norwegian original to compare. I consider Nolan's work British over American, even if he works in Hollywood. |
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 6:51:40 GMT -5
Exactly. It's like re-recording a classic album. It's almost always a major dud. There are many movie remakes that were better than the original. But MOST aren't. Most are hack jobs. That's like saying pop music is good because occasionally there's a new pop song that doesn't suck. |
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 6:53:51 GMT -5
There are many movie remakes that were better than the original. But MOST aren't. Most are hack jobs. That's like saying pop music is good because occasionally there's a new pop song that doesn't suck. You are referring to recent remakes. Even Pacino's Scarface is a remake. |
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 6:59:37 GMT -5
Scarface isn't very good either. Not in my opinion. I'll take Carlitto's Way or Donnie Brasco over that one any day. The rappers sure love it though.
|
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 7:05:19 GMT -5
And really, that's what we're talking about: today's climate. It doesn't matter if a great remake was made 30 years ago, 45 years ago, etc. What counts is what's being made right now. THEN it wasn't an excuse to not have to write a script and now Hollywood would just as soon remake Psycho (please) or The Hills Have Eyes 2 (desperately heaving basketballs in the dark) than work on something original and viable.
Even ones you think stand a chance of improving on the limited scope of the originals often fail. Tron had great potential, given the original was such a cheese fest. Same with Clash Of The Titans. Both turd remakes. I keep thinking I'd like to see a modern retelling of Logan's Run (given the comical-though-award-winning fx from '76), but I'm afraid it would get handed to some hack director and, like most of these, fall flat. I've heard Peter Jackson's name mentioned with this for years now, but who knows. Probably be handed off to the guy handling the re-telling Basket Case 2, Leprechaun IV, or doing a modern hip-hop version of The Godfather with Wesley Snipes as Michael Corleone (now MC called Tizzle in the script).
Sorry, mostly not impressed. Certainly not impressed enough to justify the quantity of remakes being made. It's desperate....but of course it's easy, so it's obvious WHY they're drawn to it like stink on shit. You have a format, characters, a story, a built-in market already in place. It almost doesn't matter that it's not very good, so long as it does pretty well in week 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 7:16:36 GMT -5
And really, that's what we're talking about: today's climate. It doesn't matter if a great remake was made 30 years ago, 45 years ago, etc. What counts is what's being made right now. THEN it wasn't an excuse to not have to write a script and now Hollywood would just as soon remake Psycho (please) or The Hills Have Eyes 2 (desperately heaving basketballs in the dark) than work on something original and viable. Even ones you think stand a chance of improving on the limited scope of the originals often fail. Tron had great potential, given the original was such a cheese fest. Same with Clash Of The Titans. Both turd remakes. I keep thinking I'd like to see a modern retelling of Logan's Run (given the comical-though-award-winning fx from '76), but I'm afraid it would get handed to some hack director and, like most of these, fall flat. I've heard Peter Jackson's name mentioned with this for years now, but who knows. Probably be handed off to the guy handling the re-telling Basket Case 2, Leprechaun IV, or doing a modern hip-hop version of The Godfather with Wesley Snipes as Michael Corleone (now MC called Tizzle in the script). Sorry, mostly not impressed. Certainly not impressed enough to justify the quantity of remakes being made. It's desperate....but of course it's easy, so it's obvious WHY they're drawn to it like stink on shit. You have a format, characters, a story, a built-in market already in place. It almost doesn't matter that it's not very good, so long as it does pretty well in week 1. So when is the cut off year then for you? |
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 7:20:48 GMT -5
I don't know. I just know the frequency, desperation, and quality of recent ones speak to the notion that it's become a more miss than hit proposition....and it does nothing to deflate the argument that Hollywood just isn't interested in new ideas. The fact that some of the older ones have been quality and every now and again one comes along today that doesn't suck doesn't make it a great idea.
I guess I really started to take notice when they started bringing weird and average TV shows to the big screen and casting people like Paris Hilton. I'm quietly holding out for the cinematic version of B.J. And The Bear. (crosses fingers)
|
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 7:21:59 GMT -5
I don't know. I just know the frequency, desperation, and quality of recent ones speak to the notion that it's become a more miss than hit proposition....and it does nothing to deflate the argument that Hollywood just isn't interested in new ideas. The fact that some of the older ones have been quality and every now and again one comes along today that doesn't suck doesn't make it a great idea. I guess I really started to take notice when they started bringing weird and average TV shows to the big screen and casting people like Paris Hilton. I'm quietly holding out for the cinematic version of B.J. And The Bear. (crosses fingers) I know many people that think the Coens True Grit is much better than John Wayne version. Do you agree or disagree with that? |
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 7:31:18 GMT -5
I don't know. I just know the frequency, desperation, and quality of recent ones speak to the notion that it's become a more miss than hit proposition....and it does nothing to deflate the argument that Hollywood just isn't interested in new ideas. The fact that some of the older ones have been quality and every now and again one comes along today that doesn't suck doesn't make it a great idea. I guess I really started to take notice when they started bringing weird and average TV shows to the big screen and casting people like Paris Hilton. I'm quietly holding out for the cinematic version of B.J. And The Bear. (crosses fingers) I know many people that think the Coens True Grit is much better than John Wayne version. Do you agree or disagree with that? Yes, I agree. Of course that's a quality filmmaker(s) too and not Martin Weitz or Joe Kosinski or Louis Leterrier either. I've never been a big fan of John Wayne, quite honestly. Not that he can't act, but he's completely incapable of disappearing into a role. The guys he plays become John Wayne. Had The Coen Brothers remade The Hills Have Eyes I'd have been far more interested.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 7:35:08 GMT -5
I know many people that think the Coens True Grit is much better than John Wayne version. Do you agree or disagree with that? Yes, I agree. Of course that's a quality filmmaker(s) too and not Martin Weitz or Joe Kosinski or Louis Leterrier either. I've never been a big fan of John Wayne, quite honestly. Not that he can't act, but he's completely incapable of disappearing into a role. The guys he plays become John Wayne. Had The Coen Brothers remade The Hills Have Eyes I'd have been far more interested. By the way, the original Clash Of The Titans was shit. The remake is better simply for being slightly less shitty. Oceans 11 is much better than the original too. |
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 7:39:32 GMT -5
I agree that Titans was shit, even if it had some stop-animation charm....but the remake might've been great instead of fucking *yawn* typical John Carter-like bullshit. Ultimately it was a blown opportunity. So was Tron.
|
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 7:40:35 GMT -5
Oceans was because of Soderbergh and good casting. Had the guy who made Clash of the Titans made Oceans's 11 (and vice versa...Steven S made Titans), I'll bet we have a different take on each.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 7:44:20 GMT -5
Oceans was because of Soderbergh and good casting. Had the guy who made Clash of the Titans made Oceans's 11 (and vice versa...Steven S made Titans), I'll bet we have a different take on each. So are we saying here that remakes are fine as long as top quality directors are doing them? |
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 7:55:52 GMT -5
Oceans was because of Soderbergh and good casting. Had the guy who made Clash of the Titans made Oceans's 11 (and vice versa...Steven S made Titans), I'll bet we have a different take on each. So are we saying here that remakes are fine as long as top quality directors are doing them? No, but they tend to be a reflection of the artist making them. I'd rather Martin Scorsese tackle anything than Uwe Boll, for instance. I know those might be extremes, but the one thing the movies you keep bringing up have in common (including Scarface) is a quality director. The reality is that a lot of these TV-to-film extravaganzas and many of today's remakes get handed to either up-and-comers on which to cut their teeth or to people who are lesser-knowns because they come more affordably than a big name. Not to say that a lesser known can't knock one out of the park or that a dog can't have his day, but we're largely talking about average talent making questionable films or doing movies that don't need to be remade, like Halloween or Psycho. They're genre classics. Leave them alone. Mostly it's just average working with average producing average. |
|
