Thoughts on remakes

I was catching up on the Kermode/Mayo podcasts and Gareth Evans said that he's already set to start shooting the sequel to The Raid in January (I think it was) and that it's been bought for a Hollywood remake, but that he's not involved in that.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

In general, I'm not a huge fan of remakes when the original films were so successful to begin with. But I have no problem with remakes of average to bad films, whereas I've actually seen the sequel be successful.

I wanted to say same thing

This is a good point. Remakes are not always a bad thing as long as there is some rationale, different approach or artistic reason for doing so. Some great remakes out there John Carpenter's the Thing, Scarface, etc.

Take Total Recall, a movie that I didnt object to (I like the original too) and a movie which looks incredible, but the soulless nature of it meant it was almost terminally dull and pointless.

^ I preferred the new Total Recall adaptation over the first film, didn't think much of the Arnie one at all. It's opposite for me, I felt the soulless and dullness during the Arnie film.

Fair enough.

Arnies movie isn't perfect but its so idiosyncratic, silly and of its time its a bit of a treat.

The new one is too po-faced and unoriginal for me, feels like a bunch of movies stuck together.

Each to his own, my brother feels same way as you actually.

I do watch remakes. It is extremely rare that they are better than the original but sometimes it happens. I don't think that it could be considered plagerisim because most remakes change some aspect of the film to make it fit modern times better.

__________________
You are no Vader. You are just a child in a mask.

Well plagiarism is any thought, idea, or expression that is even slightly appropriated. The reason why remakes are acceptable is because they are known to be "remakes." Changing some aspect would still be plagiarism, but it's more like writing a paper in which you quote work that isn't yours. The remake movie is widely known to be a reproduction of the original, which makes it acceptable.

Having more than one adaptation of a source material isn't a bad thing, as different filmmakers bring out different aspects of the original source. However when the film has an original screenplay, it feels more like a cynical ploy to make money or a misguided attempt to 'update' the original.

__________________
You cannot have it both ways. A dancer who relies upon the doubtful comforts of human love can never be a great dancer. Never. (The Red Shoes, 1948)

Essential, I would say not. Some of them are way too much. Total Recall is a good example. I don't think they are straight plagiarism, but some I can see that being questionable. I've seen a few and I like some of them, though not most of them. I'm actually more likely to, simply because a lot of the remakes I pay attention to are remade from a time of movies I'm not really fond of.

__________________
"I may be rancid butter, but I'm on your side of the bread."
E. K. Hornbeck

I think I can count the amount of remakes I've enjoyed on the fingers of three hands. Not just remakes that are better than the original, I mean remakes full stop. There are quite a few I haven't seen though. I enjoyed these remakes:

Ocean's Thirteen
True Grit
The Thomas Crown Affair
Cape Fear
3:10 to Yuma
The Fly
Casino Royale

Some that I like.

Dawn of the Dead
3:10 to Yuma
Dredd
True Grit
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Cape Fear
The Hills Have Eyes
War of the Worlds

They need to remake High Noon. Why not?! It could star Tom Hanks, he'd be the most expensive thing about it, and with the right director even be more suspenseful without getting campy.

Hanks in a western? Hhmm. Russell Crowe as the marshall maybe?

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...orks-at-929527

'High Noon' Remake in the Works at Relativity (Exclusive)

10:00 AM PDT 9/16/2016 by Tatiana Siegel

Based on the 1952 Oscar winner, the new version will be set in the present day along the cartel-controlled U.S.-Mexico border.

In its first major move since emerging from bankruptcy in April, Relativity Studios has acquired the remake rights to the 1952 Academy Award-winning film High Noon.

The modernized version, which will be set in the present day along the cartel-controlled U.S.-Mexico border, marks Relativity's first new project post-Chapter 11. It also signals the type of films that newly installed president Dana Brunetti will pursue as he looks to rebuild the studio and put his stamp on Relativity's slate more in line with his previous projects as a producer on such pics as The Social Network, Captain Phillips and House of Cards.

Brunetti negotiated directly with Karen Kramer, the widow of High Noon producer Stanley Kramer, to secure the rights. Kramer will produce alongside Stephen S. Jaffe. Relativity’s co-CEO Ryan Kavanaugh will executive produce alongside Brunetti.

Relativity will produce, finance and distribute the film.

“High Noon is one of the most iconic films of all time,” said Brunetti. “I’m honored to be a part of modernizing this timeless story and bringing it to a new generation.”

The original High Noon centered on retiring sheriff Will Kane (Gary Cooper), who vows to stand alone to protect his small town when he learns that a vicious local criminal has been released from prison and is coming back to seek his revenge. The film won four Oscars, including a best actor nod Gary Cooper. Considered one of the all-time classics of cinema, High Noon also starred Grace Kelly as Kane's pacifist wife and employed the ticking-clock timeline that made it more of a dramatic thriller than a Western.

“Stanley’s signature films were about social justice, in one form or another,” Karen Kramer said Friday in a statement. “And in High Noon, he even struck an early blow for the empowerment of women. We are delighted to be making this picture with Relativity.”

The studio will move quickly to attach a writer, followed by a director, and has made the project a high priority.

__________________
.
If I answer a game thread correctly, just skip my turn and continue with the game.
OPEN FLOOR.

Why did Poltergeist NEED to be remade?
Just to insert more computerized equipment, cell phones, global tracking mechanisms and remote-control drone toys into the plot? Not to mention CGI (which didn't look any better than the FX in the original)?
And I'll tell you this... a Scotsman is in no way any kind of improvement over a weird, southern-accented, midget lady!!!

http://www.movieforums.com/community...26#post1420226

__________________

Excellent review, Rodent! You hit on ALL the points!

I actually thought The Magnificent Seven (2016) is a pretty good remake of a film which is a remake.

I also entertain thoughts of modern films made with a cast from an earlier decade.