Film remakes: do they ever succeed?

I agree with you guys, that the second version of "The Thing", by really fun director John Carpenter, was fabulous. Very good little sci fi flick, full of suspense, horror and surprises.
John Carpenter is a master of the genre. He's the one who also directed films like "Escape from New York", with Kurt Russell, "The Fog", the original "Halloween", "They Live", "Vampires" with James Woods, the remake of "Village of the Damns" with Christopher Reeves and a bunch of other good little sci fi and fantastic movies. And if you don't, you'll be interrested to know, Ryder, that the guy does his own music! He composes musical scores that are always perfect for the action of his films.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

I agree with you guys, that the second version of "The Thing", by really fun director John Carpenter, was fabulous. Very good little sci fi flick, full of suspense, horror and surprises.
John Carpenter is a master of the genre. He's the one who also directed films like "Escape from New York", with Kurt Russell, "The Fog", the original "Halloween", "They Live", "Vampires" with James Woods, the remake of "Village of the Damns" with Christopher Reeves and a bunch of other good little sci fi and fantastic movies. And if you don't, you'll be interrested to know, Ryder, that the guy does his own music! He composes musical scores that are always perfect for the action of his films.

---

That's really cool! i've always been a fan of his. I never knew he did his know scores though.. he is def an amazing talent..

Count me in the school of thought that the only movies which should be remade are those with great concepts but poor execution OR it has been a sufficient number of years since the original was made that the remake would be a significant difference and do the story justice.

You know the Mad Max remake/reboot whatever is coming soon. That's borderline bad because Mad Max has such a great cult following. If not for the fact that it's with Tom Hardy I'd probably be un happy myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyderMonroe

I liked the Bourne remake a lot but the original was still better imo.

---

Ryder, I think you and Mr. Blonde are talking about two different things, maybe? My interpretation is that he is referring to the Matt Damon version being better than the old version with Richard Chamberlain, and that you mean the remake from last year was not as good as the Matt Damon version. Is that right? I would also agree with both of those assessments.

I didn't even know about an older version! With Richard Chamberlain, Max? I have to see this eventually.

The Chamberlain version was very true to the book Dan. As a result, I am one of the only people who enjoyed it better than the Matt Damon version, which was apparently a better production.

What I remember about the Chamberlain version is that it was very long, containing nearly every sequence of the original book. So in retrospect it probably would not hold up very well to the Matt Damon version and was only enjoyable for me because I had just finished the book when I saw it on tv.

A book too! Who wrote it, do you remember, Broncofan?

Robert Ludlum. I was just a kid when I read it, so it might not be very good writing, but it kept my attention:).

Edit: Just read a review of the Chamberlain version. Apparently it was quite different from the book as well. So there goes that;

Thanks! I might just eventually try the book. Ludlum is not a bad writer in his genre.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

I agree with you guys, that the second version of "The Thing", by really fun director John Carpenter, was fabulous. Very good little sci fi flick, full of suspense, horror and surprises.
John Carpenter is a master of the genre. He's the one who also directed films like "Escape from New York", with Kurt Russell, "The Fog", the original "Halloween", "They Live", "Vampires" with James Woods, the remake of "Village of the Damns" with Christopher Reeves and a bunch of other good little sci fi and fantastic movies. And if you don't, you'll be interrested to know, Ryder, that the guy does his own music! He composes musical scores that are always perfect for the action of his films.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxpower

Ryder, I think you and Mr. Blonde are talking about two different things, maybe? My interpretation is that he is referring to the Matt Damon version being better than the old version with Richard Chamberlain, and that you mean the remake from last year was not as good as the Matt Damon version. Is that right? I would also agree with both of those assessments.

---

oic. I wasnt aware the Matt Damon Version was a remake. Thanks for clearing that up or me . :)

I'm in the anti-remake group, but ironically, I'm one of the few people who enjoyed the remakes to Get Carter, Halloween, Clash Of The Titans, and Total Recall. RoboCop also looks good.

I loved the remake of Total Recall, but they should have named it differently. If all you are going to take from a movie is one part of the story (memory loss in this case) then you aren't really remaking the film, you're just slapping the name on something else for quick recognition. Clash of the Titans did the same thing, although it wasn't very good and it was based on a not so good original. I still love the original though.

in my opinion, the US version of Insomnia sucks big time in comparison to the Norwegian original.

Best remake ever imho was Howard Hawks' 1940 film His Girl Friday starring Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell remake of the 1931 movie The Front Page (which in turn was based on the broadway show). There have been several subsequent remakes, all of which are pale shadows of Hawks' movie.

Fully agree on His Girl Friday - its the example I always use in the remake debate

The Italian Job the maybe?

i can think of some successful remakes;

king kong 2005,...the fly 1986...oldboy 2013....inglorious basterds 2009...

dawn of the dead 2004...the departed 2006...the blob 1984

the mummy 1999...the nutty professor 1996

planet of the apes 2001...village of the damned 1995....willard 2003

the wolfman 2010

Curious choices -Oldboy has received some of the worst reviews of Spike Lee's career so far, I don't think anyone cares enough about film to rate The Blob before or after, but I must admit I didn't know Inglourious Basterds was a re-make and had to look it up. I saw the re-make once and can't remember much about it except that most of the characters in it appeared and disappeared along with my interest, but the first version might be worth seeing. Tarantino, like Spike Lee, is one of the most over-rated directors of recent years. Tarantino never got beyond Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, and Spike Lee has only made one watchable film, Inside Man (2006).

Quel maledetto treno blindato (1978) - IMDb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Curious choices -Oldboy has received some of the worst reviews of Spike Lee's career so far, I don't think anyone cares enough about film to rate The Blob before or after, but I must admit I didn't know Inglourious Basterds was a re-make and had to look it up. I saw the re-make once and can't remember much about it except that most of the characters in it appeared and disappeared along with my interest, but the first version might be worth seeing. Tarantino, like Spike Lee, is one of the most over-rated directors of recent years. Tarantino never got beyond Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, and Spike Lee has only made one watchable film, Inside Man (2006).

Quel maledetto treno blindato (1978) - IMDb

---

.depends on what is one's like. Cuz i've heard far too many people rave about Tarantino's D'Jango Unchained ,..as well as Kill Bill.
If i depended upon reviews,then there would have been a ton of guilty pleasure movies i would missed out on.
BTW, i enjoyed Spike's Oldboy more than the original.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

Thanks! I might just eventually try the book. Ludlum is not a bad writer in his genre.

---

Well just so you know the Chamberlin version was a TV mini-series. Looong LOOOONG and dull. No action hardly at all that I can remember.

i'm interested to see what the remake of Enter the Dragon is going to look like...
(supposely will re-change the original name)

http://screenrant.com/enter-the-drag...-2-ross-34467/

I've never seen a remake that was as good as the original.
Some films like True Grit for example,i won't even view.

when I lived in Los Angles during the writer's strike an agent pulled me aside and told me the Hollywood code. One of the things he said was remakes, get ready for them.

I think because of the nostalgia factor remakes never live up to the hype, but I also feel that directors take the short route knowing that people will come just for the brand name and the way Hollywood studios work if a profit is turned then good... and probably a green light for more. If a studio makes 10 films in a year they really only expect 3 or 4 to turn a profit. The rest is a funny money washing...

i liked the new spiderman and suoerman better than the old ones, which surprised me. Proper crazy stuff. nearly over it now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Piper

I've never seen a remake that was as good as the original.
Some films like True Grit for example,i won't even view.

---

If you won't even view them, how are you ever going to know if they're as good/better than the original?

That example could'nt possibly be better than the original,could it?
Are you telling me it is,if so i'll give it a go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Piper

That example could'nt possibly be better than the original,could it?
Are you telling me it is,if so i'll give it a go.

---

have you seen shooters the liverpool gangster flick??? :D

Haven't seen it Sammi,i've seen two listed,i suppose i'll have to watch both,and eat humble pie if the second is better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Piper

Haven't seen it Sammi,i've seen two listed,i suppose i'll have to watch both,and eat humble pie if the second is better.

---

the scouse one is the good one;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SammiValentine

the scouse one is the good one;-)

---

Isn't it always :dancing:

I did like John Carpenters The Thing, The Fly and Girl with the Dragon Tattoo more than the originals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Piper

Isn't it always :dancing:

---

is rice:D

in most cases, the original material is often regarded better than the remake. That may be because it is in fact better but also because too often, nostalgia and the idea of originality count too much in the mind of a critic.

Now, what are we willing to call a remake? Is Michael Bay's Transformers a remake of the 80s cartoon? Is Batman Begins a remake of Keaton's 89 batfilm? Is that itself a remake of the Adam West 60s flick? Is an american version (ala The Departed, Vanilla Sky and The Ring) a remake of the foreign film? Is Evil Dead 2 really a remake of the first or do we go with the business story behind the brief retelling? Where do we stop?

To me, given the broadest definition of a remake, which is a movie that is more than just inspired by a previous movie, the most successful remakes...that is movies that I believe are better than the one that inspired them are (in no particular order):

Casino Royale
Scarface
Ocean's 11
Vanilla Sky
3:10 to Yuma
The Departed

I could list The Fly and True Grit but it has been so long since I saw either original that I can't say if the more modern movies are so much better.

For a while I've been pondering that instead of remaking movies that were good to begin with, they really should remake movies that were terrible bombs in the first place.

Did you ever see a movie that had a few things working, and yet they screwed it up, but if they just fixed, this, this that, and that other thing, it would've been great. Or it was a crappy movie that was based on a great book. Those are the ones that would make great remakes. Maybe even moreso if you picked remakes made from _notorious_ cinematic bombs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tara Emory

For a while I've been pondering that instead of remaking movies that were good to begin with, they really should remake movies that were terrible bombs in the first place.

Did you ever see a movie that had a few things working, and yet they screwed it up, but if they just fixed, this, this that, and that other thing, it would've been great. Or it was a crappy movie that was based on a great book. Those are the ones that would make great remakes. Maybe even moreso if you picked remakes made from _notorious_ cinematic bombs...

---

I like... a short list for them to remake

Strange Days
Howard the Duck

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by south ov da border

I like... a short list for them to remake

Strange Days
Howard the Duck

---

If by Strange Days you mean the Katherine Bigelow film with Ralph Fiennes and Angela Bassett, no way.

You shouldn't mess with a Bigelow movie. That lady knows exactly what she's doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tara Emory

For a while I've been pondering that instead of remaking movies that were good to begin with, they really should remake movies that were terrible bombs in the first place.

Did you ever see a movie that had a few things working, and yet they screwed it up, but if they just fixed, this, this that, and that other thing, it would've been great. Or it was a crappy movie that was based on a great book. Those are the ones that would make great remakes. Maybe even moreso if you picked remakes made from _notorious_ cinematic bombs...

---

:iagree: That, Tara, may be a statement of the bleedin' obvious, but it hits the nail right on the head. Most remakes are anaemic attempts to cash in on a far superior original in the hope that the new generation haven't seen it yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robertlouis

If by Strange Days you mean the Katherine Bigelow film with Ralph Fiennes and Angela Bassett, no way.

You shouldn't mess with a Bigelow movie. That lady knows exactly what she's doing.

---

I loved the film--- only reason I was mentioning it is because of it not doing well in the box office. I personally agree with you on it shouldn't be touched but stranger things have happened.

I think there is a difference between remakes of films in the same language and those which are taken from other sources: the remake of The Ladykillers - one British the other American- didn't work; Kurosawa's Seven Samurai is a vastly superior film to The Magnificent Seven yet the Sturges films is pretty good and has some great performances, especially from Steve McQueen. The Departed, by contrast is a poor copy of Infernal Affairs. Where the remakes succeed, as I think has been said before, is where the technology can take an old story to new levels, which is where we have got with the tedious need to produce Superman, Batman and all that stuff. I think it is telling that the remake of a western, True Grit was problematic, the genre doesn't change much with modern technology -or does it? Can anyone imagine a re-make of The Searchers, or She Wore a Yellow Ribbon? Remaking a John Ford must surely be heresy by any standard...