All of those are based on literary works though. It's not a remake in my book if you return to the source material.
I'm not opposed to a remake if it's an improvement on an original, (does anyone think the two previous adaptations of The Maltese Falcon are any good?) but it's a safe bet most are greenlighted these days to cash in on brand name recognition, and avoiding the hassle of developing an original idea from scratch.
Where were you in '77?
TheBoost said:
"The Wizard of Oz" with Judy Garland was the reboot of a series of remakes going back 20+ years.
"The Maltese Falcon" with Bogart is the remake of a remake.
"Frankenstein" with Karloff was remake, as was Lugosi's "Dracula."
Hitchcock remade his own movies.
I'm pretty chill on the idea of remakes. Judge a movie by its own merits.
None of those movies were made in 1998-2014.
True, remakes for a quick buck are awful but without remakes we would have no...
Magnificent Seven by John Sturges
A Fistfull of Dollars by Sergio Leone (And to some extent Star Wars)
His Girl Friday by Howard Hawks
The Fly by David Cronenberg
The Thing by John Carpenter
Reservoir Dogs by Quentin Tarantino (In large part)
Scarface by Brian De Palma
Evil Dead II by Sam Raimi (In large part)
Cape Fear and The Departed by Scorsese
12 Monkeys by Terry Gilliam
Bad Lieutenant by Werner Herzog
13 Assassins by Takashi Miike
...to name a few. When it's done for arts sake, remakes can be pretty special things.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Hollywood itself needs a remake; it's dated and no longer relevant.
Ryan McAvoy said:
True, remakes for a quick buck are awful but without remakes we would have no...
Magnificent Seven by John Sturges
A Fistfull of Dollars by Sergio Leone (And to some extent Star Wars)
His Girl Friday by Howard Hawks
The Fly by David Cronenberg
The Thing by John Carpenter
Reservoir Dogs by Quentin Tarantino (In large part)
Scarface by Brian De Palma
Evil Dead II by Sam Raimi (In large part)
Cape Fear and The Departed by Scorsese
12 Monkeys by Terry Gilliam
Bad Lieutenant by Werner Herzog
13 Assassins by Takashi Miike
...to name a few. When it's done for arts sake, remakes can be pretty special things.
I think there's a loophole for turning a Kurosawa Samurai flick into a Western. ;)
Both versions of The Thing are based on the short story Who Goes There? Carpenter's version getting into the chameleon aspect and elements the Howard Hawks version couldn't go near in the 50's. The only deliberate homage Carpenter made to the original film was a shot of the Norwegians measuring the saucer under the ice.
Where were you in '77?
DuracellEnergizer said:
Hollywood itself needs a remake; it's dated and no longer relevant.
...which is why people are turning to TV for quality storytelling.
A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em
Or books, if they're anything like me. :) There was a time when good stories didn't come from movies and TV shows you know...
RicOlie_2 said:
Or books, if they're anything like me. :) There was a time when good stories didn't come from movies and TV shows you know...
Yeah!!! Smash the internet, spinning wheels and the printing press and go back to sharing folk tales over the camp fire. Are you with me brothers!??
;-) Joking Ric
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
TheBoost said:
"The Wizard of Oz" with Judy Garland was the reboot of a series of remakes going back 20+ years.
I am going to bet that more than a few of these are silent movies. I think we can allow a loop hole for remaking silent movies.
"The Maltese Falcon" with Bogart is the remake of a remake.
I've seen all three versions. None are as good as Bogarts and neither of the other two lead actors could hold a candle to Bogart's Sam Spade.
"Frankenstein" with Karloff was remake, as was Lugosi's "Dracula."
again, the originals were silent movies.
Hitchcock remade his own movies.
true, and his remakes are usually better than the originals. perhaps a loophole should be allowed for when the maker of the original does the remake?
Warbler said:
Hitchcock remade his own movies.
true, and his remakes are usually better than the originals. perhaps a loophole should be allowed for when the maker of the original does the remake?
Unless they're like George Lucas, in which case we don't want them to remake any movies whatsoever.
As far as I'm concerned, remakes should only be made by people who have love/respect for the original movies they're remaking. Most remakes made today aren't made by such people, but people who either don't like the originals, are apathetic to the originals, or have never even watched the originals to begin with.
The only problem with that is that the guy that remade Psycho might qualify as someone that loves and respects the original.
RicOlie_2 said:
Warbler said:
Hitchcock remade his own movies.
true, and his remakes are usually better than the originals. perhaps a loophole should be allowed for when the maker of the original does the remake?
Unless they're like George Lucas, in which case we don't want them to remake any movies whatsoever.
truth.
The remake of "The Omen" was pretty terrible, and not even nearly as scary as the original.
Warbler said:
The only problem with that is that the guy that remade Psycho might qualify as someone that loves and respects the original.
Hmm. Yes. Perhaps I should also add that the person who remakes a film shouldn't just love/respect it, but also have something significantly new to bring to the table; if you're just going to regurgitate a movie without putting a fresh spin on it, then what's the point?
What the fuck is this threat aboout now?!
Chickens, obviously.
Possessed said:
Chickens, obviously.
Chickens with duck le orange?
I thought this threat was about hijacking an airplane and flying it into the Hollywood sign. *shrug*
DuracellEnergizer said:
I thought this threat was about hijacking an airplane and flying it into the Hollywood sign. *shrug*
That would work too. Why not a biplane?
ChristophMer said:
What the fuck is this threat aboout now?!
Oh hai Patman 3.
^It bothers me that I don't remember which episode that's from.
I actually immediately suspected Sam, though I'm not sure. He just hopped in all confident like and started criticizing with some very strange linguistic patterns. Who knows? I figured I'd wait and see instead of jumping the gun. I hurt darklordoftech's feelings because I was too confident that he was FatherSkywalker.
Completely agree that there's nothing inherently wrong with remakes.
Unless you're remaking a troll with a new pseudonym, right?
Okay, I get it. Back on topic.
Other adaptations of existing stories don't really count as remakes from my perspective.
All film adaptations of Jane Austen novels are adaptations of the books not remakes of each other, they are also evil.