Are re-makes ever better?

Recommended Videos

chowderface

New member
Nov 18, 2009
327
0
0
It's rare, because there are several things that need to come together for a remake to be any good (for the purposes of this answer, "reboots" are a type of creator-sponsored remake).

For starters, the original. The better the original is, the harder it's going to be to make a decent remake, because something that stands on its own doesn't really need to be remade. Contrastingly, remaking something bad sets the bar low, so making a remake that's better isn't that much of a strain (yet people still fuck it up). Someone earlier in the thread mentioned My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. Frankly, that franchise set the bar pretty low, so it's not saying much that it's better than previous incarnations (I won't get into a debate over whether or not it's actually good. Those topics have gotten really, really old and even I'm sick of egging you people on when they roll around). Let's contrast Red Dwarf, which was a fantastic show; like many British shows that get brought across the pond, rather than just playing the show as-is, jingoistic American networks feel the need to remake it for an American audience. The Red Dwarf remake was ''terrible'', no one liked it and I'm not even sure if you can actually find it anywhere anymore.

For another is the creator. A lot of remakes that get made and then suck, suck because what gets made is "I'll just make this movie over again, only this time I get credit for making it." If the creator doesn't have something unique to bring to the table, the remake is going to fall flat no matter what kind of cred they've got. Take, again, My Little Pony. When they gave it to Lauren Faust, she offered a fresh take on the franchise, which has contributed massively to its popularity. Take a look at that A Christmas Carol movie with Jim Carrey, though; sure, it was animated mo-cap, which no one had ever done to A Christmas Carol before, and Jim Carrey was in it, but they didn't actually do anything new with the story (and doing that mo-cap animation thing didn't work for Polar Express or Mars Needs Moms either).

Then there's timing. I'm not even going to give you examples for this one. Just keep this in mind: If the actors from the original could still believably play their roles today (barring children), it's too soon for a remake.

tl;dr Yes, and My Little Pony is a good example of how to do it right, but it's not often that people DO do it right.
 

Scarim Coral

Jumped the ship
Legacy
Oct 29, 2010
18,157
2
3
Country
UK
Depends on how old the original film was or how bad it was. Example Ang Lee Hulk was a total boredfeast while the Incredible Hulk was so much better!
 

marginal

New member
Mar 21, 2009
85
0
0
Remakes I Feel are superior:

The Thing
The Fly
The Blob
Red Dragon
Invasion of the Body Snatchers - 1978 one
Scarface
Titanic
Little Shop of Horrors
Payback
The Ring - I like it better than Ringu
Man on Fire
Talented Mr. Ripley
Ocean's 11
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
His Girl Friday
Dracula - 1992 Coppala one
You've got Mail - I'm not a fan but the original movie is crap. Plus it's really just another adaptation of a musical called She Loves Me, which is the best of them all.
Tombstone - Some will say Wyatt Earp, but either is better than My Darling Clementine or Gunfight at the OK Corral


Remakes that aren't as good as the original but still good.

Cape Fear
A Fistful of Dollars
The Magnificent Seven
King Kong
The Departed
The Grudge
Dawn of the Dead
Last Man Standing
 

uzo

New member
Jul 5, 2011
710
0
0
kman123 said:
I really, REALLY dig the remake of Dawn Of The Dead. I absolutely adore the end credits. That was what propelled it from a great remake to better than the original.
Damn straight. Dawn of the Dead remake far eclipsed the original. However, the remake of Night of the Living Dead (they're coming to get you Bar-ba-raaaa!!) was God awful. Also, the sheer audacity of the original - a black man? The HERO?! Trail-blazing film making at its best.
 

Treefingers

New member
Aug 1, 2008
1,071
0
0
sivlin said:
I looked up some good remakes and found that The Departed was actually a remake of some random movie called Infernal Affairs. Can't imagine Infernal Affairs was anywhere near as good as The Departed... but I could be wrong as I haven't seen it :D
"Some random movie"...? I think you meant to say "the very-successful-and-extremely-awesome movie."

Both are very good in their own way. Comparing them is understandable but ultimately kind of apples and oranges.
 

Magicmad5511

New member
May 26, 2011
637
0
0
In terms of gaming, my only examples are the Pokemon games which were remakes.
They were better, if only through graphics and only comparing on terms of modern technology.

Thing is though I instantly hold points against it if it's a remake. It's not creative, it's just taking an old idea and trying it again when it already succeeded.
On that merit I think that if a remake is to be judged against what it did differently and how that affected the game.

On this again Pokemon makes remakes better than the original because the add more to storylines and bonus stuff. Upcoming remakes like Halo Anniversary is simply a graphical update and the addition of multiplayer. I'm not sure if it's worth getting it again for a higher price and only to see it looking better and the option to face the ranting, camping groups that make up matchmaking.

TL:DR
I just don't like the ideas of remakes but sometimes they do work with Pokemon being a decent example.
Films I like even less. If the original was good then just leave it alone. I'm looking at you George Lucas.
 

johnstamos

New member
May 17, 2011
71
0
0
rob zombies Halloween remake is the best halloween movie.
there still not that great but what slasher movie is.
 

Tyrant T100

New member
Aug 19, 2009
202
0
0
The reason the Carpenter version of the Thing is considered better than the original is both are based on the book but Carpenter's version is far closer to the book. So rather than being a remake it's more of a better adaption of the novel.
 

mgirl

New member
Mar 29, 2011
177
0
0
It's difficult to say, I've seen films that are remakes and enjoyed them, but mostly I never saw the original, so I can't compare... The same goes for games really.

I've seen plenty of terrible remakes, that is, most of the 80's horror films remade with all the good bits sucked out of them, like nightmare on elm street.

What really bothers me though is the unecessary remakes, like Quarantine, which pretty much the exact same film as REC, only in English! I would like to think that this is the film industry underestimating their audience, thinking the average english speaker couldnt bear to see a decent film that isnt in their native language! Just like how the rights to remake Troll Hunter in english have already been bought....
 

Helmet

Could use a beer about now...
May 14, 2008
578
0
0
astrav1 said:
Ever watch the new Thundercats? Kicks massive ass.
Liono annoys the hell out of me, but aside from him I think all of the characters have been improved. It's really growing on me.

Back on topic, I'm going to add myself to the list of folks who loved the 2004 remake of Dawn of the Dead.

I would also like to throw out the 2007 remake of 3:10 to Yuma starring Russell Crowe and Christian Bale.
 

Jaime_Wolf

New member
Jul 17, 2009
1,194
0
0
There are a tremendous number of remakes that are better than the original. Generally, this happens when the original is relatively unknown and/or terrible. And that's why they don't get the same recognition as all of the really bad remakes - because often a lot of people don't even know they're remakes. And it's not really hard to see how this would happen: someone in a position to remake something sees a movie that completely failed to live up to an interesting premise and realizes that they could do a much better job.

For my contribution: Dune.
 

shadow_Fox81

New member
Jul 29, 2011
410
0
0
just saying.

I've never enjoyed a remake of Kurosawa.

not even the Sergio Leone ones.

Kurosawa has done some great eastern enterpretations of shakespseare (throne of blood,Ran(which were Macbeth and King Lear))
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
Reaper195 said:
BonsaiK said:
I thought the newer Dawn Of The Dead was way better that George A. Romero's one.
The only problem I had with the remake of Dawn was the running zombies. They only belong in 28 Later movies, because those are angry people, not the walking/running dead. Actual zombies do not run, it is impossible.
Since zombies are (more or less) fictional, they can be whatever the creator of the fiction tale wants them to be. They could even sparkle and romance the leading female character and technically they're still zombies if the screenwriter says so. Yes, I said that.

Running zombies was the best thing about the Dawn remake, they actually made the film scary, something that most zombie films are not. Slow zombies are silly and comical because they're not a threat - anyone in a traditional zombie scenario who can keep up a reasonable jogging pace and isn't too clumsy to trip or daft enough to lock themselves in a room with only one exit has about a 100% chance of survival. By making the zombies more powerful and quicker, there's a good reason to fear them.

The other thing the remake got righ that the original didin't is that the remake launched straight into the action - the world is crumbling by about the titme the opening credits. In other words there wasn't that obligatory 45 minutes of boring exposition and character-building that all horror movies seem to have.