See? Coolest man no longer alive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kTPOpuA_f8
Printable View
See? Coolest man no longer alive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kTPOpuA_f8
I almost completely agree with your assessments, Stavros. I've never been able to get to the end of Some Like it Hot, although on the other hand, I can't share your extreme dislike for femininity icon Marilyn Monroe, who's excessive and sometimes almost carricatural charm I just can't resist.
I think in general it's easy to realize that remaking author cinema into commercial hollywoodian movies won't work. A good example comes to my mind in Tarkowski's "Solaris", remade by Steven Sodherberg, a great director nonetheless, who did a decent job but gave in to the more pop side elements of the original to produce a love movie on the same topic. In this case of course, it was an impossible task. Also comes to mind the absolutely terrible, ridiculous, pathetic, mushy mushy "City of Angels", by "I can't remember whom", as a remake of the magnificent Wim Wenders original "Wings of Desire", written by Nobel Prize Peter Handke. I can't think of anything in this remake that's not plain wrong. Jim McBride's "Breathless", with fair efforts by a rarely good Richard Gere and a lovely Valery Kaprisky was certainly not worthy of the original Jean-Luc Godard's either, but has in this case to be put in the "well tried" department. A good example of this impossibility to remake something too personal is certainly Jean Renoir's "Boudu Sauvé des Eaux"; Paul Mazursky should have stayed out of this one ("Down and Out in Beverly Hills"), and even good French actor-director Gérard Jugnot ("Boudu").
We generally should be thankful to the gods that author's movies are ordinarily too personal to be translated into hollywoodian flicks. I can say for myself that they saved me from many ulcers and high blood pressure.
I guess it's a bit different when it comes to a second movie made on the same novel rather than on the previous movie. "Eye of the Beholder" was directed in 1999 by Stephan Elliott from a Marc Behm polar. But Claude Miller's very personal interpretation was much much better: "Mortelle Randonnée" ("Deadly Circuit"), 1983, with Michel Serraut in his greatest role and Isabelle Adjani, still a goddess at this point, is a magical movie, bordering on masterpiece. Fred Zinneman's "The Day of the Jackal" was a good movie(1973), based on a Frederick Forsyth novel, that Michael Caton-Jones' boring "The Jackal" is far from matching (1993).
Also different, I suppose, when the circumstances in which the film was produced are important. "Le Corbeau", a great, great unsung Henri-George Clouzot movie, made during the war, with a layer of meaning definitely about collaboration and the anguishing, agonizing state of occupation, could not be remade properly either despite Otto Preminger's considerable talent. Fred Zinneman's "High Noon" also comes to mind, produced painfully during the McCarthy era; Peter Hyams 1981 attempt was far from the original, despite its conversion into sci fi, in "Outland", with Sean Connery.
There's also this... what? cuteness, vanity (the word I have in mind is "coquetterie") of remaking exactly or almost exactly an old cinema classic. Very good director Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu" and Gus Van Sant's "Psycho" are fun to watch, but still not at the height of the originals, maybe largely because, well... they simply aren't.
I guess remakes in the comedic genre are particularly difficult to render, especially when translation is involved. Having access to original French versions might give me some biases, but many remakes stucked in my throath over the years. A few movies were remade after fabulous French comedic actor's performances, Pierre Richard. Richard is one of the 3 or 4 greatest giants of French comedy. He had a unique style and created an inimitable and charming character that he pretty much kept from one movie to the next. "La Chèvre", "Les Fugitifs", "Le Grand Blond avec une Chaussure Noire" and "Le Jouet" (dir. : Francis Veber, Yves Robert) to name only a few, were remade after wild European successes under titles: "Pure Luck" (with Martin Short and Richard Glover), "Three Fugitives" (Nick Nolte, Martin Short), "The Man with One Red Shoe" (Tom Hanks), "The Toy" (Richard Pryor). Despite good efforts in each cases, none came even close to be as good as the originals.
I guess that in this case too, the uniqueness of a director's style can be difficult to match. I'm thinking in this case of Edouard Molinaro. Mike Nichol's "The Birdcage" and Billy Wilder's "Buddy, buddy" were pale in comparison to nice comedies "La Cage aux folles", "Trois Hommes et un Couffin" and "L'Emmerdeur". French director Jean-Marie Poiré is even more personal: the remake of his delightful and delirious "Le Père Noël est une ordure" (which would translate by "Santa Claus is a Dirty Son of a Bitch") was made into a pale and confused "Mixed Nuts" by Noah Ephron.
I realize that I'm writting a complete essay, here, so I'll finish this up with the exceptions. I think that science-fiction movies, because of technical progress in special effects, are bound to potentially be better in remakes, providing of course, that they're not, as I said, author movies (you won't see a good remake of Fritz Lang's "Metropolis" or Tarkovsy's "Solaris", "Stalker" or "Offret"), and that they therefore remain at pop level, made for wide audiences. So are horror movies for the same reasons. I prefer the 1978, Philip Kaufman version of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" to the Don Siegel, 1956 version (which on the other hand, was a fabulous carricature of the MacCarthism); in fact, I prefer the 78 version to the two ulterior ones, by Able Ferara in 93 and Oliver Hirschbiegel in 2007 ("The Invasion", with a once again cold and stuck up Nicole Kidman).
Suspense have also had their share of improved versions. One that immidiately comes to my mind is "Cape Fear". The 1991 Martin Scorsese version, with Robert de Niro and an all star cast is much better than the 1962 J. Lee Thompson original.
There. I'm stopping right here before putting everybody to sleep...
Hollywood has been in the remake game since its earliest days. The current wave sucks but it is more poor choices in what they are updating.
2 success that spring to mind immediately for me are "Scarface" and "John Carpenter's The Thing".
I also don't consider "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" a remake as it was just an adaptation of the same book.
Some movies should be left alone. Like the GF no way this movie should ever be remade. As is 3 almost ruined it for me.
Oceans 11 was good
As Miranda said, there was no reason to re-make the Getaway, one of the few Jim Thompson books to successfully be made into a movie with the great Steven Mcqueen.
A good project for a re-make would be the most recent Jim Thompson book turned into a movie, The Killer Inside Me. The directing wasn't bad, and Casey Affleck turned in an excellent performance as Lou Ford. However, something is clearly missing when a very good book makes an average film. I'm not saying all good books should make good films, but room for improvement here.
But I can't think of any examples not mentioned. Recent re-make I saw that destroyed the original was the Manchurian Candidate. Ugh.
I don't know if Clash of the Titans is a remake, or just Clash of the Titans re-imagined, but it seems like a completely different movie.
I always thought that was a movie that could benefit from almost a scene by scene remake, with modern effects and CGI , and it is actually quite different.
The old one , I love, but it just aged rather badly in my opinion.
Some do; some don't.
I liked the remake of Assault of Precinct 13 -- at the time:
Assault on Precinct 13 (2005) (Theatrical Trailer) - YouTube
The original is really good....Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmirandameadows
This, love this movie :)Quote:
Originally Posted by saifan
John Carpenter's The Thing trailer (1982) HQ - YouTube