Page 1 of 2
Remakes!
Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:28 pm
by randomwab
Is it just me or are remakes shit? Really though, i have a really bad thing with remakes except a few. And im not talking about The Twin Snakes, im talking about films here more so. Hollywood seem like they cant think up any new ideas, as they seem to me like they just want to go back and remake cult classics. Some examples of remakes gone bad are Psycho, Dawn Of The Dead, Assault On Precinct 13, Planet Of The Apes, Get Carter, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Grudge, The Ring, Cape Fear, Thomas Crown Affair, Italian Job and the list go's on, though thats all i can remember. Now, some of these films can be considered good on there own, Planet Of The Apes is great, but then i saw the original and realised that compared, it was pretty crap. I understand that they have to reimagine it for this day and age, but bloody hell, why do they usually turn out so bad. The one remake that a absoloutly HATE has to be Dawn Of The Dead. I almost wept when i saw that. Dawn original was an amazing film, George Romero at his best. I heard they were remaking it and i was pleased. I left the cinema with hate, hate that i hadnt feeled in a long time. They took the corpse of Dawn of the dead, dug it up, raped it, then made it a zombie. Honustly, if you have seen the original, dont watch the remake unless you want disapointment. Weird though, was the fact that the only people who liked it that i know of were 12-13 year olds, who claimed the original was "moldy d00d".Honustly, they really need to have a proper look at the original before they make these vile pieces of ....., do they think we want the original theme on steroids. The original Assualt On Precienct 13 was great because although it had alot of action, it had a dark, gritty feel to it, which the remake just completely ignored, to replace with snow and action. That meant that it was just complete action, and that dosent make a good film. Now, i have to admit that there are good remakes. The Thing is an excellent remake of the original "The Thing From another Planet". Invasion of the body snatchers is pretty good, though it is more of a sequal. I suppose Dracula 1992 could be considered better, though im not sure, the 1992 film was good, nut i dont think it could beat Christopher Lee, ahh yes. Games have produced some good remakes, Resident Evil on NGC was alot better though i still consider the original the best, mainly because it feels like a cheesy b-movie, with the crap acting and voice acting and that great soundtrack. I could say MGS2 as it is meant to be a re-do of Shadow Moses, in the plot at least. At the minute though i cant think of any more, but if anyone else knows or remember any good or bad remakes of films or games then please do say!
Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:32 pm
by Biglife
I actually enjoyed both versions of Dawn of the Dead. I just saw Assault las night and liked it. The movie remake I'm absolutely dreading is the Dukes of Hazzard remake. It sounds like total shit. I grew up watching that show and Knight Rider, so a bad remake is pretty hurtful.
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:10 am
by randomwab
i had no idea they were remaking dukes, and after my nagging, i dare say it will be crap
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:09 pm
by 87th
On the games side Resident Evil, Metroid, Final Fantasy and Tony Hawk's 2 have all had some fairly good remakes. Some like Spy Hunter and Defender have been completely forgettable. It's more about who's making the remake rather than the idea that remakes are simply shit.
Oh, and on this subject, I have to mention how terrible the Godzilla remake was... ugh.
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:56 pm
by ReasonWhyNot
Dawn of the Dead was a fair remake. I enjoyed it. It's nowhere near the level of excellence that is Romero's film, but it certainly beats the pants off Tom Savini's shitty little remake of Night of the Living Dead. Nothing was right with that film. The remake of Dawn of the Dead was actually quite scary at times, which made the price of admission well worth it. And to e honest, Dawn of the Dead didn't even need to be a remake of the original. It could have sufficed as an original film all on its own, since there's not too much relating to Romero's film (the mall stuff is very brief). A few remakes that I personally dislike are A Fistful of Dollars, The Thing, and Solaris. I love Leone's spaghetti westerns, but I'm a huge fan of Kurosawa's Yojimbo, and Fistful just pales in comparison. The Thing was alright at times. I'm not a fan of Carpenter's films, but I thought The Thing was effective. I'm still in favor of the original, but the remake had some things going for it. It stuck closer to the original story the film was based on. And as for Solaris, well, it was just boring. Tarkovsky's original is a good film. Not a great film, but it has the advantage of not starring George Clooney. Oh, I forgot Twelve Monkeys remade from the French short La Jetee. I love the original film. It's short, but sweet. Comprised of mostly still b&w photos to tell its story. But Terry Gilliam's remake didn't do anything for me. I could go on and on I suppose, but it's pretty obvious the majority of remakes blow. Reservoir Dogs is an example of a good remake. But that's just because City on Fire was such a shitty film. So the lesson is, if you're going to remake a film, remake a bad film and make it better. Don't remake something that you have no chance of improving. If it's already a classic, you're just going to be looked down at for remaking it. I've already heard they're remaking Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch. I can't even express my outrage. When will it end?
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:00 pm
by randomwab
An excellent point, remake something bad good. It is bound to work. I didnt know some films mentioned were remakes, like 12 monkeys, which i tyhink is a great film. Also hadnt a clue Resevoir was a remake, learning lots of new and pointless facts :razz:
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:51 pm
by Biglife
Godzilla was almost as bad as the song "Come to me" or whatever P-Shiddy called the remake/butcher of Zep's Kashmir.
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:24 pm
by Ninja Kurosai
ReasonWhyNot wrote:Reservoir Dogs is an example of a good remake. But that's just because City on Fire was such a shitty film.
Reservoir isnt a direct remake, it was just inspired in great part by City on Fire
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:34 pm
by Crowley
Add Alfie to the list of completely unnecessary movie remakes. As for music, I've got a few. Limp Bizkit & Behind Blue Eyes. The only good thing about that is that led me to discover the original by The Who. Here in Finland one of the bands I despise most, HIM, has scored a couple on that area. Wicked Game and Don't Fear the Reaper. Both totally inferior to the originals.
What is the problem with people and original ideas these days? Going slightly astray, in the recent years in Spider-Man comics (ah, the depths of my nerdiness uncovered!) they've brought back two classic character who had been dead for a decade and then proceeded to completely squander them. Has it somehome become impossible to create good new villains within the last ten years?
Some kind of 'new' trend seems to be making Hong Kong-style completely over-the-top martial arts movies with Hollywood budgets. Whoop-de-doo, what a festival of originality. I realize that truly original ideas don't really exist, just ways of combining old ones so that they appear fresh, but couldn't they at least make a valiant attempt?
Christ. I'm only 22 and I'm already a cynical old man longing for the good old days. Most of which existed when I wasn't even born yet.
Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:27 am
by randomwab
I could argue that HIM did alot for those songs, but i cant be bothered, as i like HIM, and Dont Fear was good before though i do think it is beter now
Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:33 pm
by Warrior Bob
I'm quite a believer in the philosophy that remakes are best done when trying to take something bad and turn it into something good. I originally spouted this philosophy in reference to musical remixes and covers, but I think it applies here.
There is of course the trend that regardless of how good a remake is, if you loved the first you won't like the remake as much as if you had seen it first.
I look at remakes as more of 'oh, let's see this person's take on this story' rather than hoping they'll make something good better. I am not often disappointed when I do this.
Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:29 pm
by ReasonWhyNot
Ninja Kurosai wrote:Reservoir isnt a direct remake, it was just inspired in great part by City on Fire
Just because Tarantino doesn't want to admit it's a remake, doesn't mean it's not a remake. Reservoir Dogs is a hell of a lot more similar to City on Fire, than The Flight of the Phoenix or Dawn of the Dead remakes are to their predecessors. But they're not denying that they're remakes. Tarantino only admits his inspirations when he's called out on them it seems.
Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:33 pm
by ReasonWhyNot
If I become a director, I'd like to make spaghetti westerns (in the tradition of Leone) or noir films. Though I wouldn't limit myself to only those genres. Liniting yourself to anything is when directors lose their creativity. Always be willing to step out of your bounds and try something different. Even if you're bad at it or unknowledgable about it.
Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:16 am
by Omega579
Too bad most big budget directors are bound by their studios as puppets allowing people like Jerry Bruckheimer to churn out template drivel with his crappy directors like Michael Bay. Most "directors" nowadays aren't even artists but more technicians. With the worst being music video directors going to movies.
Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:18 am
by randomwab
Or movie directors going to music videos, they want something special, but that cant really be done in a 3 minute long video
Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:14 pm
by Spartikcus
There is absolutely nothing worst than a Music Video director overdirecting in a film.
Am I the only one who has noticed the major spike in stupid Horror Flicks?
The Grudge, Alone in the Dark, Boogeyman, etc.
Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:18 pm
by Warrior Bob
Actually, I just saw the movie Casshern recently, and I would have described it as a feature-length music video.
Thing is, I loved it.
Posted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:02 am
by Spartikcus
Hey I can call Chicago or Phantom of the Opera a music video.
What I was talking about what music video directors making actual movies with dialogue and plot.
Posted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 11:32 am
by Jonathan Ingram
Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry both made the transition to the movies quite spectacularly with Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine.
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 6:45 am
by Spartikcus
I find those movies a bit to emotional, I want to see something like Star Wars.
George Lucas came out of the blue with that and look how succesful it was.
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 8:56 am
by Jonathan Ingram
Spartikus wrote:What I was talking about what music video directors making actual movies with dialogue and plot.
Umm, I think that Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine both have those things, if I'm not mistaken.
Spartikus wrote:I find those movies a bit to emotional, I want to see something like Star Wars.
Just because you don't like them, it doesn't mean they aren't great movies.
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 9:12 am
by randomwab
Star Wars is actually really just a remake of Flash Gordan, Lucas said it himself
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 10:54 am
by Artemio
I did find the later Star Wars films deeply emotional, I ended crying a lot more with the new Episodes I and II.... :razz:
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:14 am
by ReasonWhyNot
Omega579 wrote:Too bad most big budget directors are bound by their studios as puppets allowing people like Jerry Bruckheimer to churn out template drivel with his crappy directors like Michael Bay. Most "directors" nowadays aren't even artists but more technicians. With the worst being music video directors going to movies.
You know, I always hear people give Michael Bay and Bruckheimer the most flack. I agree that they're mostly just big budget schlock, but they're hardly the worst of the worst. That guy Bob what's-his-name, who just did the sequel to Baby geniuses last year. He deserves your criticisms. At least Bay can slightly entertain I say. The Rock was entertaining. Even Pearl Harbor was entertaining. But money is power, so in the end, the film with the bigger budget will almost always come out on top in the box office due to marketing. But sometimes the credit is deserved. Steven Spielberg has always been that kind of a director and so has James Cameron. But I really do prefer the quieter, more independent films.
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:19 am
by ReasonWhyNot
Spartikcus wrote:There is absolutely nothing worst than a Music Video director overdirecting in a film.
Am I the only one who has noticed the major spike in stupid Horror Flicks?
The Grudge, Alone in the Dark, Boogeyman, etc.
What about Alex Proyas (director of Dark City)?? I think of him as a talented direfctor, and he started out just directing music videos. Look, it makes no different how you got your start as long as your intentions are true. Sure, a lot of bad directors came from directing music videos. The guy who directed Catwoman being the latest. But bad directors can come from anywhere. Your background shouldn't be important in judging who's qualified to direct a good movie. I think in these times of Hollywood, quality just isn't at all important with directors. It all comes down to how much money they're able to rake in over one weekend, whether or not they have to hire the biggest names to get people in theatres.