The truth about remakes...

Author: greencapt
Date: 23-Dec-2005, 10:09 PM

Author: greencapt
Time: 23-Dec-2005 10:09 PM
Post link

Please, spread the word.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/greencapt/remakekittens.jpg

This has been a Greencapt public service announcement.

"I'm Greencapt and I endorsed this ad."

Author: Adamwankenobi
Time: 23-Dec-2005 10:26 PM
Post link

That's a whole lotta dead kittens!

Author: sean wookie
Time: 24-Dec-2005 10:53 AM
Post link

Add in all the other things that kills kittens.

Author: Darth Chaltab
Time: 24-Dec-2005 10:55 AM
Post link

At this rate I'm going to have to train my dad's kitten to use a shotgun, what with all the remakes, and as Adam said the other stuff.

Author: sean wookie
Time: 24-Dec-2005 11:31 AM
Post link

I said the other stuff!

Author: GundarkHunter
Time: 24-Dec-2005 5:57 PM
Post link

There's nothing wrong with a remake done well; it's just that most recent remakes have been mediocre at best.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author: greencapt
Time: 24-Dec-2005 6:12 PM
Post link

I challenge anyone to ask themselves not is a remake 'done well' or 'technically superior' or whatever but in fact 'was it NEEDED'? What was the mind-set of the people involved in the decision to remake a film or to make an old television series into a film?? Was it that they saw something inherent in an original work that might have been overlooked thus leading them to want more people to see it? Was it simply a matter of 'I could have done better-ness'? Or was it just the allure of a studio cashing in on a name in the vain hope that no matter what swill they produce and stamp a familiar name on it that they can probably win their opening weekend boxoffice before word of mouth gets around?

I could go on and on about my feelings for this practice. There have been some remakes that I've liked- but very few. Were I a paid filmmaker (not just an amatuer one) though I don't think I'd even WANT my name on a remake project. After all you'd already have huge expectations against you and rarely do you get a chance to prove yourself as a filmmaker. If a director, writer, etc want to prove they can make good product than they should prove it by making an original product. And the sheer volume of recent remakes, especially in the horror genre, create diminishing returns for the whole industry. Audiences get sick of them and eventually will go to them less and less.

Anyhow, its Christmas eve and I save more bitching and writing for later.

Author: Miasta
Time: 24-Dec-2005 9:12 PM
Post link

Without a doubt I am generally opposed to re-makes. I can think of very few that I like, and even fewer that were absolutely worth it. The only one I can bring to mind right now (and I will have to think if there any others) is The Thomas Crown Affair. Fist of all, I thought it was a really good movie. Second of all, it was totally worth it to see Renee Russo's...well, it was just a good movie.

I actually just thought of another movie that was probably worth it. I think Ocean's 11 was a worthy re-make, and in a sense a needed re-make in order for Ocean's 12 to exist, and I really liked that movie better then the first, though I would probably be in the minority in that.

There are probably plenty of good re-makes that are, in the end, pointless. I enjoyed Dawn of the Dead, but there was really no need for it. I feel the same for King Kong. I don't know. Re-makes have been apart of Hollywood way before the current re-make explosion. It just seems every other mainstream movie is a re-make these days, and that does suck!

Author: Klingon_Jedi
Time: 24-Dec-2005 10:27 PM
Post link

About the best remake I've ever een is Battlestar Galactica. THe new series takes the premise of the old and runs in a unique direction with it. So they keep enough that it's still BSG, but change enough to warrent it.

Made for IE Forum's Episode III theme month - May 2005.

Author: Adamwankenobi
Time: 24-Dec-2005 10:56 PM
Post link

Originally posted by: Klingon_Jedi
About the best remake I've ever een is Battlestar Galactica. THe new series takes the premise of the old and runs in a unique direction with it. So they keep enough that it's still BSG, but change enough to warrent it.

Yeah, that's about the nly time a remake has the slightesyt chance of working; when they take something original and give it their own creative twist. Note that I said "creative," which precludes the Dukes of Hazard movie from being on the list.

Author: Switch Radic
Time: 25-Dec-2005 12:30 AM
Post link

I do tend to agree with greencept on this subject. remakes only work in very, very rare instances. Often times, remakes that go in an unexplored direction can work, but I think that's dependant on a persons taste. For instance, I like the direction that the Spielberg WoW went while some of you on this board would disagree. In truth, I've never seen the original film nor did I watch the show. I am currently reading the book and the book feels like the remake. Maybe that's cause i only saw the remake, I don't know.

"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie

Author: Miasta
Time: 25-Dec-2005 11:53 PM
Post link

Two other good re-makes I can think of that were good, and I'd say needed. "The Fly" and "The Thing." I think they were both remakes, and from what I've gathered most would consider those superior to the originals - but not taking anything away from the originals since I have not seen them. However, it seems the environment those re-makes were made was completely different then the re-make cash-out frenzy currently gripping Hollywood. Though, I do not know for sure. Maybe there have been other greedy re-make eras before, and we are just suffering through the current one.

Author: GundarkHunter
Time: 27-Dec-2005 10:24 AM
Post link

I have to say that one of the best remakes I've seen recently was Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I watched it with the kids last night and was impressed by how it successfully incorporated elements of the novel that had been left out in the previous version. I know a lot of people complained about the direction in which Johnny Depp took the Willy Wonka character, and while I may not agree with some of the decisions he made as an actor, it was not enough to negate the rest of the film.

Simply put: Well done, Tim Burton; I can finally forgive you for what you did to Planet of the Apes.

With respect to the issue of other greedy remake eras, there have been films that have been remade on several occasions (The Maltese Falcon, anyone?), but not on the same wholesale scale as the current era. Hollywood really needs to start looking outside for more novel ideas. The success of independent film in recent years shows that.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author: greencapt
Time: 27-Dec-2005 10:44 AM
Post link

As not to get my blood pressure up this morning...

Here's my personal rule of thumb for remakes:

If you set out to remake a MOVIE (basing your remake on the original film), its probably a bad idea. If you are going back to the source material (book, etc) and trying to do what you think is a better job then you *might* be ok (or even if it sucks your heart might be in the right place.)

I finally saw Burton's 'Charlie' and I'll agree that is was closer to the novel- a much more literal translation in many ways. But I personally find the Wilder film to be a more enjoyable movie overall. That said, any one of us can read the same book and visualize it different ways- that's the joy of reading. Its when filmmakers try to stamp their book-based product as 'definitive' that I have to laugh. Remember the year of 'Bram Stoker's Dracula' and 'Mary Shelley's Frankenstein'? Funny I though both of those author's long dead. And what I saw was 'Francis Coppolla's Dracula' and 'Kenneth Branaugh's Frankenstein' neither of which were much like my reading of the novels. Luckily *that* trend ended quickly.

I realize new ideas are very rare (if not nearly impossible) but I'd rather see a well-executed 'knock-off' or derivative film than a crappy film with a familiar name.

And there ARE exceptions that I like of course. I love Carpenter's 'The Thing' but then again I also love 'The Thing From Another World'. Both are great cinema IMHO. And yes, Cronenberg's 'The Fly' is awesome as well and makes an entirely different type of film. But what do those have in common? Great filmmakers! Those are directors who busted their chops making original pictures and then decided to work on labors of love. And it shows. I'm still torn about the need for PJ's 'King Kong' but I have heard its well done and it was a labor of love. Hell, PJ is a bigger geek than most of us. Then again geeks with huge budgets can be dangerous at times.

More later...

Author: GundarkHunter
Time: 27-Dec-2005 3:00 PM
Post link

Originally posted by: greencapt
As not to get my blood pressure up this morning...

I'll concur. One thying I would love to see is a remake of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. As much as I enjoyed Blade Runner, I'd love to see what a talented filmmaker like Darren Aronofsky could do with the source material. Of course, I'll probably get crucified for this suggestion. I still feel that for all of its visual inventiveness, Blade Runner suffers one fatal flaw: Ridley Scott and his screenwriters didn't "get" the book.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author: Bossk
Time: 27-Dec-2005 3:11 PM
Post link

Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
One thying I would love to see is a remake of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. As much as I enjoyed Blade Runner, I'd love to see what a talented filmmaker like Darren Aronofsky could do with the source material. Of course, I'll probably get crucified for this suggestion. I still feel that for all of its visual inventiveness, Blade Runner suffers one fatal flaw: Ridley Scott and his screenwriters didn't "get" the book.

I'll agree with you on that one. I, too, would like to see this remade. How about Christopher Nolan helming it?

"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com

Author: Adamwankenobi
Time: 27-Dec-2005 3:14 PM
Post link

Originally posted by: Bossk

I'll agree with you on that one. I, too, would like to see this remade. How about Christopher Nolan helming it?

I concur.

Author: greencapt
Time: 27-Dec-2005 3:19 PM
Post link

That's exactly what I mean- I'd be fine with another film of 'Do Androids...' even though I *love* Blade Runner. Just don't stick the 'Blade Runner' name on it- try to make it their own movie and see if their (whoever the 'they' are) work can stand of its own merits.

Author: Bossk
Time: 27-Dec-2005 3:38 PM
Post link

Originally posted by: greencapt
That's exactly what I mean- I'd be fine with another film of 'Do Androids...' even though I *love* Blade Runner. Just don't stick the 'Blade Runner' name on it- try to make it their own movie and see if their (whoever the 'they' are) work can stand of its own merits.

Well, the book stood on its own merits well before Blade Runner killed it. If they were to make a movie true to the core of "DADOES," there would not even be a need to relate it to Blade Runner at all as they would be wholly different films save for a few shared ideas and names. Let the fans figure it out on their own.

Author: DominicCobb
Time: 4-Mar-2014 5:21 PM
Post link

I saw the Robocop remake a couple weeks ago… pretty good, actually, despite the kitten that was killed at its expense.

Author: SilverWook
Time: 4-Mar-2014 5:33 PM
Post link

Considering two remakes of 80's romance flicks came out last month, (Endless Love and About Last Night) that puts the kitten list at three for the year.

Where were you in '77?