What comes after the frickin' remake

spidey

spidey

Shogun Assassin
I guess remakes will pass. There are some of them that are cool, but they all make me think of how sluggish and unoriginal the industry is becoming. Has the remake become a standard? I wish it were only a fad. I remember the 80's cornball sci-fi kick. I remember liking it. Not so with the remakes.

What is next?

When will it get here?
 
The last film I saw in a theater, I saw 2 trailers before it and they were both remakes... "The Hills have eyes" and "when a stranger calls".
It will never end.
 
NO!!!!!!! It can't go on, it just can't. It makes no sence. There is reason to everything, granted, but this vein of filmmaking is self distuctive when done in this amount. I'm sure the rest of the world is laughing at us for this, too.
 
Even Shakespeare used source material. Today source material can be a novel, a play, a TV show, another film, a comic, whatever... "Remakes" have been around forever and they're not going anywhere. And sometimes a film remake can be better than the original -- Ocean's 11 is one example.
 
I think we'll all be pleasently surprised by Hills Have Eyes.

This one seems like it's trying something new and I want to see if Aja really has the goods. Hopefully High Tension wasn't just a fluke.
 
hey but i was even in shock or aw about the preview. and when a stranger calls i could sleep through.
 
Yea Stranger looks like the same kind of remake garbage we're used to at this point. Hills though...keepin my fingers crossed...
 
Matthew B. Moore said:
NO!!!!!!! It can't go on, it just can't. It makes no sence. There is reason to everything, granted, but this vein of filmmaking is self distuctive when done in this amount. I'm sure the rest of the world is laughing at us for this, too.
Click to expand...

Not to mention all the television shows that are now turning up as movies. The only one I can think of that I've liked was "The Fugitive."

(I'm not counting the Star Trek franchise which is probably a little hypocritical of me. :) )
 
uhrgl said:
...And sometimes a film remake can be better than the original -- Ocean's 11 is one example...
Click to expand...
Gotta disagree.
Apples and oranges, my man...apples and oranges.

The two versions couldn't be more different IMO.
Apart from Sinatra and Clooney both playing
characters with the same name, and the fact that
both films are set in Vegas, there are surprisingly
few similarities.

The Soderbergh version (which I very much enjoyed
by the way) is more akin to The Sting in feel than to
the Rat Pack classic that spawned it.

Come on...you can't poo poo with the 'Pack.
 
^^^ Yeah, agreed. Altho technically a remake, they're not the same movie. There are sub-genres to remakes, like Burton's "reimagining" of Apes.
 
How long before "Casablanca" or "North by Northwest" is remade? They have used the same premises over and over again. Sooner or later someone will mess with all the old favorites. Some movies missed their mark the first time around and deserve a second chance, but to just recycle something that was already well done waters down the original. Chainsaw Massecre is a perfect example, the new one is very well done but why? Dollars of course. Somewhere out there(I hope someone on this site) has a new vision and will reinvigorate the industry much like Tarantino, Spielberg did etc. We need it every few years just to keep from watching "Gilmore Girls the Movie". (Yes I'm secretly a Gilmore girls fan, its all those pop culture references).

I want to be excited in the anticipation of seeing the next "Pulp Fiction" or "Sixcth Sense", not disappointed that the latest reincarnation didn't live up to expectations. So I put it on all you youngsters here at dvxuser and thruout the world. Get out and make something original and rescue my movie collection from having anymore crappy remakes. I am quite sure after "King Kong" some studio is rewriting "Godzilla vs Mothra" with the latest CGI, actors and music. When the dust clears " its about the story stupid". Great thread.
 
actually i've heard talk about casablanca remake and beyonce is attached some how..... wtf
 
spidey said:
actually i've heard talk about casablanca remake and beyonce is attached some how..... wtf
Click to expand...

This has to be just a joke. I haven't read anything about it in the trade papers...not that that's the difinitive source. I don't even think young, aggressive execs would tempt a remake with Beyonce. People might finally revolt.

I go back and forth on the remake thing. The only positive thing I can think of is that it gives younger audiences a chance to see stories that were important 20+ years ago, that they otherwise wouldn't know existed.

While many "classics" may be obvious to the older among us and the filmmaking young folks, they probably aren't to today's "target audiences".

I just wished that so many of the remakes weren't so bad and of course I just wish that instead of doing a remake of an already great movie for 80 million dollars that the studios would just put half that into publicizing and re-releasing the original. If only it were my world. :)
 
uhrgl said:
^^^ Yeah, agreed. Altho technically a remake, they're not the same movie. There are sub-genres to remakes, like Burton's "reimagining" of Apes.
Click to expand...

This is the case where a remake spawns the birth of another remake. The Planet of the Apes Feature series was, by far, my favorite as a kid. When I was that you I just thought it was cool, but when I got older, the signifigance of the story and the social commentary with in just made the series all that more amazing.
Did it cry for new technolgy? Sure. Did it even lend itself to be rewritten? Hell no!
And what do they do? They pull the signifigance out of it and turn it in to good looking shite. Same with the new Texas Chainsaw.
There should be worldwide agreement between filmakers on the rules for a remake.
Image, if you will, that a remake is like a cover song. If you are going to cover a song it needs to sound better, or aleast even with the original. Case in point - Head on by Jesus and Mary Chain to it's cover by the Pixies. Both are great. One is dronish, the other is a little more crunchy and hard. Both work. Both say the same things, but both are delightfully different.
American film is dwelling in the toilet. I didn't know the bowl went that deep.
 
This is the case where a remake spawns the birth of another remake. The Planet of the Apes Feature series was, by far, my favorite as a kid. When I was that you I just thought it was cool, but when I got older, the signifigance of the story and the social commentary with in just made the series all that more amazing.
Did it cry for new technolgy? Sure. Did it even lend itself to be rewritten? Hell no!
And what do they do? They pull the signifigance out of it and turn it in to good looking poo pooe. Same with the new Texas Chainsaw.
There should be worldwide agreement between filmakers on the rules for a remake.
Image, if you will, that a remake is like a cover song. If you are going to cover a song it needs to sound better, or aleast even with the original. Case in point - Head on by Jesus and Mary Chain to it's cover by the Pixies. Both are great. One is dronish, the other is a little more crunchy and hard. Both work. Both say the same things, but both are delightfully different.
American film is dwelling in the toilet. I didn't know the bowl went that deep.
 
This is before your time but in the sixtys whenever a hit song was made by practically anybody, Pat Boone and other crooners would release a version. Hollywood has always had a lot of copycatting(remember biker flicks) of anything thats successfull. Having been a semi-pro musician for most of my life I understand doing covers with some originality. I don't think its quite the same as remaking a movie. The motivation for the studios is obvious, a series or old classic already has an audience, thus they have a certain amount of built in success.

It is very hard for a remake to live up to expectations. As I have already posted "Kong" was a disapointment to me. I don't want to watch the remake of "Mighty Joe Young" or "Godzilla". The technical improvements in "Kong" did not IMHO make up for the less than inspiring casting and editing. As of yesterday "Kong" was not at break even for just the production budget. I'm sure it will make money but I enjoyed a DV movie much more, "Pieces of April" which only made about 2.5 million but was shot and transfered for $300,000.

This brings us to another point. Why aren't people going to the movies like in past years. Well it might be that you can't go by yourself without dropping twenty bucks and then to have to watch a film that you'll find in the bargin bin at Wally world within six months is not appealing. I am becoming a fan of small films. Less expectation and I'm often pleasantly suprised. Because of the internet I research a movie more before I go watch it than ever before. If its a dud I'll wait for the dvd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top