Should Dirty Harry be remade today, but actually be a good remake?

I usually don't like the idea of remakes, but that is one where I felt a remake could be good, that you could do a lot with the material, especially since there hasn't been a vigilante cop movie in a long time it seems. There have been a couple of low budget indie ones over the last few years, but not a big budget mainstream one for quite a while it seems.

Would it be worth remaking though, as long as it was good of course?

Depends. Do you feel lucky? Personally, I dont believe you could ever replace Clint Eastwood. It would never be the same. Just another boring cop movie.

Oh I thought they could do an engaging cop movie, depending on the script. But yes, I am not sure who would replace Clint Eastwood, but they would have to find someone.

It's just, there hasn't been a mainstream vigilante cop movie, that I know in the last maybe 10 or more years, so I thought it would be different compared to other movies coming out now.

I've never thought of Dirty Harry as a vigilante cop. He does bend the rules a little, but he stays within the confines of the law.

He made it a point in Magnum Force that he's no vigilante.

Meh. It'd be a dark (like, physically dark), brooding, over-commentating snooze fest. Besides I don't think a character who hates literally everyone would set very well in today's America.

__________________
|>
|
Ami-Scythe

No I want a bad remake of Dirty Harry...I want Harry to be a wheelchair bound transgender named bubbles who has to stop the evil neck beard who goes from school to school stealing their black history months.

That's true, perhaps vigilante is the wrong term, or too extreme.

As for the character who hates everyone, I don't think he did, rather than just a rumor going around the police force.

No. Why? To me Dirty Harry is not a character like Robin Hood or Ebeneezer Scrooge who can be played by just about anyone. He's pretty much Clint Eastwood defined. Would make about as much sense as remaking the Dollar trilogy.

Another remake of a classic is exactly what we don't need.
They did release a vigilante movie called Peppermint which people seem to like, not based on a pre-existing property.
Hollywood seems to have the mindset that coming up with new ideas is way too hard, but innovative newcomers like Denis Villeneuve, Yorgos Lanthimos and Damien Chazelle have proved that's not the case.

Yeah that's true, I guess since I said that they haven't made a vigilante cop movie in a while, they could just make one that wasn't Dirty Harry.

No, only bad films should be remade but better, Like the Bourne movie/s from the 80's that no one remembers.

__________________

Yeah I can see that but Hollywood seems mostly interested in remaking good movies. One movie I would like to see a remake of is Invasion of the Bee Girls. Not that it's bad, but it hasn't lived on, so why not?

No, agree with previous posts that it's all about Eastwood and it's bad movies with potential that should be remade.

Mark Wahlberg as Dirty Harry...'this time he makes everyone's day!'

I thought Hugh Jackman would have made a great Dirty Harry if they made it 10 years ago, but maybe too old now. But yes, perhaps just make another more original cop who bends the rules movie instead?

If they remade Dirty Harry in today's Woke society.


Female
Black
Name: Harriet

Not allowed to use the prefix "Dirty"


Harriet (2021)
A tough-minded cop, hellbent on giving lectures to young wannabe criminals and has degrees in sociology and psychology.
Can do backflips.

__________________

Not woke enough, surely they'd have to be non-binary and called something like Emma-George.

Obviously not. I think this is less to do with Eastwood's original incarnation of the character being irreplaceable (but hey, as long as people can get your flaccid jabs at wokeness out while they can, I guess) than it is to do with the entire concept of the film being so fundamentally reactionary that it won't hold up in a day and age where police brutality has become much more of an issue that it was on the film's release (and even way back then you had people like Pauline Kael calling the film out over its fascistic pro-cop tendencies). I think that's also why there haven't really been a whole lot of "vigilante cop" movies in recent years, or at least they've tried to temper their subject matter one way or another by either adding extra nuance or diluting their edginess.

In any case, might I recommend you watch Bad Boys for Life?

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

Well when it comes to today's police brutality, in the movie, Dirty Harry broke the rules when it came to stopping a serial rapist killer who was on the loose, causing the city panic. Today's police brutality, they go after, I guess you could say 'petty criminals'? So therefore, wouldn't police brutality, on a serial rapist killer, be viewed as more positive in a movie by comparison?

No, that line of thinking basically boils down to "but what if someone really deserved it?" and that opens up its own questions about who gets to decide who deserves what and on what grounds (if any, as another problem with police brutality is when it ends up being visited on people who are ultimately innocent of any wrongdoing). For comparison's sake, consider The Dark Knight and how Batman uses a sonar network to track the Joker's location by hacking civilians' mobile phones across the entirety of Gotham City - while his justification for using it is to capture a mass-murdering terrorist like the Joker, Lucius Fox still notes that it's a grossly unethical use of his technology due to it relying on invasion of privacy (and Batman is aware of that, hence why he ultimately has Lucius destroy the machine after he catches the Joker).

Oh okay, that's a good comparison. It's just that in movies like Taken (2008), audiences have no problems with Brian Mills breaking the rules to get his daughter back, so I thought they would have no problem today with Dirty Harry breaking the rules, to rescue a serial killers next victim.