Well, now I have a new fear to base my nightmares around. Dead on, though. Princess Bride is perfect.Oliver Pink said:
Films You Really Don't Want To See Remakes Of
- Thread starter tigermilk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz. Those would NOT work with American actors, or anyone other than Edgar Wright directing.
Pulp Fiction, or anything by Quentin Tarantino. Remake his films and so help me Gabe I will smite many a Yank.
Pulp Fiction, or anything by Quentin Tarantino. Remake his films and so help me Gabe I will smite many a Yank.
Agreed.Furburt said:
A remake of Dr. Strangelove would be a terrible idea. It is so perfect in it's casting, acting, and time that any attempt to do it again would just turn out to be utter shite.
Also the remake of Red Dawn that is supposedly coming out sometime soon is a terrible idea.
Well it depends. I hate remakes of any good movie. If the movie was good to begin with, why mess with it and try to redo what's already been done well?
The only time I could see a remake being a good thing is if the original was based on a book series or some other franchise but the movie turned out to be really, really bad. Although even then it would depend; for example I'm not sure trying to remake The Last Airbender would ever be a good idea.
The only time I could see a remake being a good thing is if the original was based on a book series or some other franchise but the movie turned out to be really, really bad. Although even then it would depend; for example I'm not sure trying to remake The Last Airbender would ever be a good idea.
Plenty of remakes are genuinely brilliant (as has been mentioned above - films like The Thing, and Scarface) - so clearly just the fact of a film being a remake doesn't automatically make it rubbish.
There have even been quite a few examples of remakes of good films which themselves have been at least enjoyable (Scarface again, Invasion of the Bodysnatchers (70s version is my favourite, but most of the other versions are decent), The Italian Job remake rocked along nicely, even if it could easily have been called something else entirely, Evil Dead II is basically a remake of Evil Dead... and so on).
The existence of a remake doesn't obliterate the original either - if it's rubbish, we are allowed to go back to watching the good version.
Sometimes directors even have good reasons (other than money, I mean) for remaking a film - Evil Dead II was Raimi attempting to bring his Evil Dead story to a wider audience - and much improving his presentation in the process. Van Sant's Psycho remake, while definitely not as good as the original, was his attempt to bring the story to an audience who won't watch black & white films.
We've had a tradition of retelling stories in different ways for centuries - look at how many modern films are based on Shakespeare, and how many of his stories are based on older myths - sometimes stories do need to be updated, because the story is good, but the medium gets dated.
In the case of films, that means remaking it with modern technology and special effects (and possibly some changes to reflect the mood of the day). I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Surely it's better that dated or badly executed films get remade rather than good stories get forgotten?
There have even been quite a few examples of remakes of good films which themselves have been at least enjoyable (Scarface again, Invasion of the Bodysnatchers (70s version is my favourite, but most of the other versions are decent), The Italian Job remake rocked along nicely, even if it could easily have been called something else entirely, Evil Dead II is basically a remake of Evil Dead... and so on).
The existence of a remake doesn't obliterate the original either - if it's rubbish, we are allowed to go back to watching the good version.
Sometimes directors even have good reasons (other than money, I mean) for remaking a film - Evil Dead II was Raimi attempting to bring his Evil Dead story to a wider audience - and much improving his presentation in the process. Van Sant's Psycho remake, while definitely not as good as the original, was his attempt to bring the story to an audience who won't watch black & white films.
We've had a tradition of retelling stories in different ways for centuries - look at how many modern films are based on Shakespeare, and how many of his stories are based on older myths - sometimes stories do need to be updated, because the story is good, but the medium gets dated.
In the case of films, that means remaking it with modern technology and special effects (and possibly some changes to reflect the mood of the day). I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Surely it's better that dated or badly executed films get remade rather than good stories get forgotten?
In terms of any film that is good, while I prefer the original Scarface, I do also like the remake.mikozero said:
I do personally prefer The Departed to Infernal Affairs, but that may be partially to do with being more familiar with Scorseses ouveur and background allowing a reading I didn't get with Infernal Affiars (knowing nothing about Andy Lau's background or work beyond Infernal Affairs).
I think the 1931 and 1936 versions of 'The Maltese Falcon' are generally considered pretty poor or "misfires" that came prior to Huston's 1941 version. As they are literary adaptations perhaps it blurs the proverbial waters as to whether they are remakes, especially as Huston stuck very close to the original text.
Die Hard. Anyone stupid enough to give that remake the go-ahead will fail and I will revel in such a failure. No Bruce, no movie.
Fun Fact: Bruce Willis' real first name is Walter, but he thought it sounded shit and not very movie star-ish, so he omitted it and went with his middle name, Bruce.
Your welcome.
Andrew Lau you poor bastard. Then you went on to make two more of those films, when you really shouldn't have.
Fun Fact: Bruce Willis' real first name is Walter, but he thought it sounded shit and not very movie star-ish, so he omitted it and went with his middle name, Bruce.
Your welcome.
My god if that ever happened...But to be honest, I think that one's pretty safe. Excellent film.tigermilk said:
Meh, since Hot Fuzz was essentially the bridge movie between the American and British audiences (Point Break references, the American parodies of hard boiled cops), if a remake happened it'd have to do a 180 and be an American film with British references. I don't care who does that, it just wouldn't work.AlphaOmega said:
Well Infernal Affairs was a great film, but it was just a stroke of bad luck that [sub]motherfucking[/sub] Martin Scorsese was going to be directing the remake.the Dept of Science said:
Andrew Lau you poor bastard. Then you went on to make two more of those films, when you really shouldn't have.
Clockwork Orange- A remake would just ruin it. Or The Thing. Yes, i know The Thing is actually a remake of a black and white film, but remaking John Carpenters gibbering alien masterpiece with CGI would be heartbreaking...
Avatar. Oh wait... thats right.
Titanic. SH*T! and its going to be in 3D!
hm.... Citizen Kane goes to washington.
yeah, i know, that will never happen, but i really hope someone doesnt get the genuis idea to try.
Titanic. SH*T! and its going to be in 3D!
hm.... Citizen Kane goes to washington.
yeah, i know, that will never happen, but i really hope someone doesnt get the genuis idea to try.
Alien/Aliens
If they do that, Your going to see that there is a gunman holding the creators of the newer one hostage on the news.
If they do that, Your going to see that there is a gunman holding the creators of the newer one hostage on the news.
See, I would like to see and Avatar:The last Air bender remake, where the film wasnt cut short because people believe it to be aimed at kids so clearly couldn't be over 1hr30 long. Ive seen the cartoon. Its really quite good. In the film, most of the plot is lost, a lot of the character building is lost, understanding the concept of bending is lost, there is no character development at all. All of these things could be fixed by a proper 2hr30 film that isnt sidelines as a kids film. Like, at the start of the film why does Katara care so much if Aange goes off with the fire nation, theyve know eachother for like a day. Oh wait its because they are supposed to have know each other for nearly 2 weeks. In the middle where 7 or 8 earth benders do a crazy little dance that looks bloody stupid especially when nothing happens, when 8 earth benders do that they are supposed to be able to level a sizeable bloody building!rockyoumonkeys said:
Serenegoose said:
It's an absolute tragedy just how many people refuse to see The Princess Bride just 'cause of the name.
