doubleKO said:

I don't completely agree, for me it depends on the quality and characteristics of the remake in question, as well as my feelings for and familiarity with the original material. I enjoyed the new Star Trek and The Italian Job remake. I held the belief that Clash of the Titans should be remade for years and was very disappointed with the result when it finally was. Some regard the 1990 remake of Night of the Living Dead as superior. I agree that most remakes I have seen are inferior and demeaning to the original work in some way, but I am not against the idea altogether. It does make less sense to remake something in its original format.

My biggest problem with remakes is that by using the same name and material, comparisons are automatically invited and the importance of this comparison is often overblown to the point where the "loser" of the comparison suffers from a similarly overblown negative public perception rather than being judged on its own merits or appreciated for its own strengths.

Of course we are talking about Hollywood, and the major influence here is money. This means that movies that could be significantly improved due to having a great premise and shoddy execution are going to be sidelined in favour of stuff that they already know people like and will pay to see. So the movies that get remade will usually be the movies that need it least.

I agree about the Italian Job! It was a lot of fun (and I like what the director had to say in the commentary about not using CGI). As for Star Trek, I do think TV serials easily lend themselves to be remade (a point I made in my first post).

I did not see the new Clash of the Titans but why do you think it could benefit from being remade?

You're right about remakes inviting comparisons with previous efforts and Hollywood's zeal for money. I think these are certainly factors in the failures of remakes.