Forums Horror Collectibles
REMAKES - Good or Bad?

Is remaking a film good or bad?In this thread we'll try and answer this questions from multiple points of view. From loyal fan boys to studios to the general audiences . . . what are the biased and unbiased opinions and facts?

Use this thread to duke it out . . . if you hate remakes tell us why, if you love remakes post it!

Just please don't take anything anyone says personal, everyone has an opinion and are just as entitled to theirs as you are to yours.

I know many of us have invested parts of ourselves in some of these films.

If some people make this too personal their posts will be deleted (pretty much means no name calling or putting other down because difference of opinion . .. this is fair warning).

I Challenge you to think outde the box and try and look at remakes from the oppote potion you take, rather if you're for or against them.

I'll start things off.

I've written something milar before but I thought it fits in here nicely.All the remakes are just Hollywood stealing old school ideas trying to make a buck . . . yes, I'm having a good time reviting old ideas but I never forget the sole reason why they are making remakes -to make money! Much of the "art" is lost in the remakes. Now, can I enjoy some of these remakes? . . .sure I can. I see many of them as nice tributes plus I'm not married to the originals and the originals will always be there for me to watch in case a remake sucks bad.

However, the only way to enjoy a remake is to have an open mind when going in (this doesn't by any means guarantees you will like every ngle remake you see) and it gives you more hope of not feeling like you wasted your money. I try to go in as unbiased as posble and make my decion based on a couple things . . . .

-did it keep me entertained? -Is it good when not compared to the original? -did it pay it's respects to the original?

Now, if I walked into remake as a sole, biased fan boy of an original because I just love it so much (which I admit I have a few movies out there that I would get furious over a remake) then yeah . .. . there's a 50 - 80% chance you are NOT going to like it. Is it wrong to go into a remake biased? Absolutely not! Us fans take ownership of films we grew up with and to see something that we relate with our past tampered with can be VERY upsetting. Plus, we the TRUE fans (not the general audience) aren't nearly as stupid as hollywood thinks we are . . . .and I honestly am still undecided if Hollywood is targeting fans or the general audience when it comes to these remakes. We all know they only make remakes because they are so cheap to make (most of them in the past decade at least) and they can churn a profit. From an executive's decion remakes make PERFECT sense.

However, if everybody would stop seeing remakes they would fade away . . . this is true. However, I believe that many people in the general audience hardly know when a movie is a remake. I can't tell you how many conversations I've had with people who don't know "Last House on the Left" is a remake.

So remakes often introduce these old ideas (that they would have NEVER known about) to new generations.I'm sure these remakes will fade over time, just like all other film fads . . . but the fan boy de of me wants them to end however the buness/collector de of me wants it to continue for a while longer.

there ok but there are to many remakes comeing out these days

I thought Rob Zombies "Halloween" remake was shite, but at the same time there were things about it that I liked. As I've mentioned before, I liked the fact that Michael Myers was huge, but at the same time hated the fact that he was nothing more than a nutter in a mask. Same goes for "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" remake. There were things I hated about it, but at the same time there were also things I liked about it. So, I don't really think that remakes are a bad thing at all. They aren't to everyone's taste, but you can't please everyone.

I stay here thinking if someday we will agree with that. I'm sure not, but we could always try.

Remakes are not bad, in my opinion. The fact that the people in Hollywood and great names Like Wes Craven, Stephen King, Tim Burton and a lot of others writers and directors haven't a good idea for a horror novie drives me crazy.

I'm not telling you that I hate remakes. It's a strong word, hate. But I don't like the most, because in 99% of the cases I watch them comparing to the original, and every little detail they change on the remake make it a piece of crap, in the most times.

I agreed with Joel, and think in some way remakes are a good thing, because the new people on horror doesn't knew a half of the great movies if they didn't remakes them, as we will see with The Wolfman 2009.

I heard a lot of people telling me that didn't like F13th series, but after the remake will pass to watch the movies, only ofr curioty of how Jason was and things like that. This is a good point for the remakes.

But we are forced to dislike them in a year where the great releases were remakes. What great horror movies were released last year? And for 2009, what are the great deals? NOES remake, My Blood Valentine 3D remake, F13th remake, Hellraiser remake, The Wolfman remake. Even

was remaked for USA as Quarentine! And REC is an acutal movie! What happened to the sequels? I rather even a prequel or a reboot then a remake, but nor even a damn prequel they want to do...

You know what I'm saying?

Only remakes. We NEED something new, and good sometimes, like BTM. I'm not a huge fan of BTM, but God, was the only one slasher great production in an entire year!

I don't know for sure if I'll stop to go the theaters and see the remakes, beacuse, in the end, is only what we have to do, at least in my opinion...

BAD!

To me there's 2 types of remakes and I'll use Halloween 2007 and Friday the 13th 2009 as examples.

-Halloween 2007 is what I call a carbon copy remake, taking characters, lines, kills, etc. from the original and doing them over again.

-Friday the 13th 2009 is what we may call a re-imagining where the idea may be the same but characters, kills, and story may be much different from an original.

I prefer the latter because it's a good way to revive a dying franchise (which both have become. Moreso on Friday's part). Think of how many different Dracula movies there are. TONS! Not remakes and not all sequels just tons of different takes on one idea. That's how I view Friday 2009, as a new start. Where Halloween 2007 was just...a carbon, modern copy of it's original.

my opinion will never change

no more remakes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

remakes can be good. halloween and friday the 13th for example.. gotta love seeing your favorite masked killer come back again and again!

They need someone who doesn't try to make all the content mainstream and have it actually pay it's respects to it's past films

my opinion will never change

no more remakes

Pffff

The cigars are making you a dull boy!

I'll start a campaing called Stop Smoking Bisco!

bring it on glauco!

my opinion will never change

no more remakes

Pffff

The cigars are making you a dull boy!

I'll start a campaing called Stop Smoking Biscobring it on glauco

Glauco!

Bisco is right! Remakes are bad!

Glauco repeat after me: Remakes are BAD, BAD!!!!

I don't believe remakes are necessarily a bad thing.

In some cases they can out shine there predecessor.

Remakes aren't a bad thing, but more so the motive behind why a movie is being remade.

For example, a remake should bring something new, fresh, and original to the story.

Otherwise you defeat the purpose in the first place.

Remakes that capatalize on this idea are The Thing, The Fly, Cape Fear, King kong, Scarface, The Departed, and I Am Legend to name a few.All can be argued as improvement's over the original's.

Problem is for every good remake we get 2 bad ones that follow.

The problem lies within why the remake is being made in the first place.

Notice the films I listed were made by such greats as David Croneberg, Martin Scorcese, Brian De Palma, and John Carpenter.

They all had the intention going in to improve upon it's predecessor.

But for the 2 bad remakes that follow every good one.

They don't have the intention going in to improve on the original.

There going in with the intention of capatalizing off that one good remake and make a quick buck.

Heres where the problem get's worse though.

When they try capatilizing off the bad remakes which were trying to capatalize off the one good remake.

Now the bad remakes start multiplying like rabbits.

Which in turn leads people to believe that all remakes are bad.

So much in fact that first word of a film being remade is met with negitivity.

Which isn't fair, but this is due to the recent trend of bad remakes Hollywood is putting out.

But like all trends it will eventually start to slow down.In clong, I would like to say that remakes aren't a bad thing.

The people behind them are.

Without remakes we wouldn't have such clascs as John Carpenter's, The Thing or David Croneberg's, The Fly.

Hands down two of my favorite horrors of all time.

Theres nothing wrong with a remake as long as it's being made for the right reasons.

Just my two cents.

Very well put...I agree 100% that the recent trend of remakes are, for the most part, very poorly made cash grabs. On the other hand you've pointed out some very excellent remakes that have been made over the years. Philip Kaufman's Invaon of the Body Snatchers remake is another example of one that was well done.

One other reason for remaking a film is to take advantage of new technology to retell the story to hopefully improve it. One of the earliest examples of this took place in 1935 when Tod Browning remade his 1927 London After Midnight as Mark of the Vampire. The reason Browning remade his film was to take advantage of the change from lent films to 'talkies'.

Very well put...I agree 100% that the recent trend of remakes are, for the most part, very poorly made cash grabs. On the other hand you've pointed out some very excellent remakes that have been made over the years. Philip Kaufman's Invaon of the Body Snatchers remake is another example of one that was well done.

One other reason for remaking a film is to take advantage of new technology to retell the story to hopefully improve it. One of the earliest examples of this took place in 1935 when Tod Browning remade his 1927 London After Midnight as Mark of the Vampire. The reason Browning remade his film was to take advantage of the change from lent films to 'talkies'.

But this cases are quite differents.

In this cases I totally agree. I don't know if there's actually a Nosferatu, from Murnau, remake. As I believe not, I'd love to see a remake, but a good remake, from it. Nosferatu was a mute movie, and this facr makes him the best clasc I ever seen, but anyway I'd love someone could remake it with new technology, keeping the same essence.

When we talk about a movie like the spanish REC, and just a few months laters we get another remake called Quarentine, this makes my heart stops. I don't like this thing about remaking films from 90s or 80s.....

Very well put...I agree 100% that the recent trend of remakes are, for the most part, very poorly made cash grabs. On the other hand you've pointed out some very excellent remakes that have been made over the years. Philip Kaufman's Invaon of the Body Snatchers remake is another example of one that was well done.

One other reason for remaking a film is to take advantage of new technology to retell the story to hopefully improve it. One of the earliest examples of this took place in 1935 when Tod Browning remade his 1927 London After Midnight as Mark of the Vampire. The reason Browning remade his film was to take advantage of the change from lent films to 'talkies'.

Lee it was also remade because the reviews of LAM were less than stellar................ the fly, the thing, cape fear and body snatchers are VERY rare instances of a VERY good remake most suck balls

king kong from jackson was too long and boring as hell. ill take the one from the 70s over his any day of the week and that was plain old schlocky!

I agree that you remake black and white movies, lent movies or movies that were made in era where techology was not like today.

Just tell me why would make a remake of Halloween or Friday the 13th? Why? What can you still change in the movie? Why remake?

Just tell me why would make a remake of Halloween or Friday the 13th? Why? What can you still change in the movie? Why remake?

Because today's audeinces can't appreciate the cheeness of the red paint they use as blood, the goofy characters, the old style of clothes they wear. I'm sure in maybe 20 years we'll see another Halloween remake for the Jetsons generation

i think remakes are bullshit.i just wish people would just do there own thing, and stop shiting on good movies.

I forget the director but NOSFERATU with Klaus Kinski I thought was pretty amazing.

All in all most remakes are weak and while today's mostly fickle youth needs to be buzzed 24/7 you can't blame them for not being able to totally appreciate a film from the 70's or 80's. Of course there are those who are SERIOUS about film and they look past things like dress and hair style but for the majority its a hard thing.

I'd love to see limited runs several times a year of clasc horrors....everything from Argento films to F13's. It wont bring out the masses but at least it'll provide some fun for us into the OG's!