1. What film (or song for that matter) should not be remade on principle?

THat would be Dirty Dancing, Footloose, and Red Dawn.

I saw that they’re remaking “Heathers” for TV.  Ugh.  Sadly, they’ve already remade Dirty Dancing as a Broadway show, and they’re going to remake it for the screen, like they did Hairspray, which also should have never been done.  Naturally, the abortion went from being horrifying strictly because it was illegal in the original to being something the character’s supposed to feel bad about.  Which is ahistorical in the extreme—-outside of Catholic circles, the main issue most people had with abortion is that you’re “getting away” with sex.  Certainly the original movie reflects this, as the doctor assumes that she got an abortion because the father wouldn’t marry her, and he assumes the wrong guy is the father.

Christ on a crutch, I can’t think of one remake that worked.

Unless, of course, we’re considering the Disney Alice in Wonderland vs. the live action 1933 film, of which I have a vague memory.

Or the earlier silent versions of the Wizard of Oz, of which I’ve seen none, but have to assume weren’t as great as original.

Elizabeth, the 1998 film—better than the Bette Davis version Elizabeth and Essex?

Hmmm.

John Carpenter’s The Thing.

The special effects are gross and terrifying and the ending is suitably bleak. Plus, it has that walrus mustachioed dude from the diabetes commercials!

It’s already a loose remake of a film that was adapted from a novella. It also happens to be the only horror film I can watch. (And the only film that isn’t ruined when something bad happens to dogs. Sod off I Am Legend!) Apparently Ron D. Moore (BSG) had penned a script that was to be a prequel of sorts but it was scrapped. Which is probably a good thing. Who wants to a see a computer generated head with spider legs crawl across the floor?

“Red Dawn”

I was just about to log in and say that. They must be having snowball fights in Hell right now, since Pho and I actually agree on something!

Yeah the remake looks sanitized. Or at least the trailer makes it look that way. And I agree with Pam about the original dance numbers feeling genuine. The remake’s dancing looks too sharp and perfect.

Aren’t they remaking Red Dawn?

Interesting. I’ve never seen that trailer, which is odd, because my job frequently involves spending whole shifts repeatedly watching movie trailers ^_^. I’ve seen the Teaser and “Magic” trailers a lot, as well as an advertisement that plays during the screenvision, but never that one.

I wonder if it’s newly released.

Pam used the words “should not be remade”, Ben.

Alas.

I bet they could do “Lost Boys” fairly well.  Perhaps they could run it with the movie adaption of “Lost Girls”, since comics are so big these days…

What film (or song for that matter) should not be remade on principle?

I think the more efficient way to phrase the question is: are there any remakes that were actually successful.  I have seen hundreds of remakes, and can count on one hand the ones that were as good as or better than the original.

Worthwhile remakes: 12 Monkeys, A Fistful of Dollars, Ocean’s 11, maybe The Birdcage and Scarface.

And I’m not sure I should count Birdcage or Scarface, because that opens up the Pandora’s Box of adaptations from plays and novels.  Jane Austin, Shakespeare and Arthur Conan Doyle would go on murderous rampages if they knew what Hollywood studios do with their material.

Any others?

And if they do remake “Fame”, I hope there’s at least one scene of Leroy shouting “LEROOOOOOOOOY JOHNSON!” and charging into a fight…

Movies it was an outright crime to remake: The Manchurian Candidate, Planet of the Apes, Psycho.

I think it is a bad idea to remake a film like this, and I will definitely not see it. However, Bebe Neuwirth is truly amazing, so I suspect she will do credit to her role. Kelsey Grammar makes my skin crawl.

Spinal Tap must never be remade.

1. What film (or song for that matter) should not be remade on principle?

I don’t know if I’m opposed on principle, but I think you’d have to be insane to attempt to remake these:
- Mean Streets
- Straight to Hell
- Glengarry Glen Ross
- The Shining

Hmmm, what’s the unifying theme? They all have strong ensembles, super-memorable performances and perfect casting. They also have a lot of memorable lines, which you wouldn’t think would be a drawback for a remake, except who wants to hear some lesser geek reading Sy Richardson’s lines?

2. If it has been remade did the remake a) suck, b) was ok on its own, or c) surpass the original in your opinion.

Offhand, the only remake of a great movie I can think of that rivals the original is Sorcerer - William Friedkin’s remake of Clouzot’s Wages of Fear. There are probably others.

I actually want to see more things like Psycho and Solaris- great directors reinterpreting films that are virtually impossible to equal. I don’t really care if they’re not all that great- I just like watching them work. I also like Soderbergh’s Ocean’s 11 thing of making something fun out of something that sucked originally.

oh come on. You know you want to see a remake of Casablanca.

I know it’s been talked about a few times over the years, but touch Casablanca and you deserve all the hate and scorn the universe can muster.  Likewise Gone With the Wind, Citizen Kane, The Big Sleep, The Maltese Falcon, The Third Man...

(I notice three of those movies star Humphrey Bogart.  Fixation on my part?...)

And just about anything Hitchcock ever did.  And Lawrence of Arabia, Blade Runner, and, of course, the unforgettable Starship Troopers.

But The Green Berets?  Please, remake it if you must.  (No insult to John Wayne or George Takai meant.)  It already sucked once, it can only get better.  And with Iraq and Afghanistan going to hell, America really needs a feel-good-about-war movie…

...you know, to watch while we turn off the lights, lock the doors, get into the cattle cars, and turn our backs on that place once called The United States of America…

Sorry tb, someone already remade The Shining as a TV miniseries.

The movie Fame caused a huge argument in my house. I was an artsy farsty and was dying to see it and my parents were having none of it because it was rated R.  No matter how good a job they do with a remake it will never resonate in the same way because I am no longer the same person.

That being said I hope that they actually bring it up to speed since so many of our “celebrities” are talentless reality show people.

They did an awful TV remake of All About Eve, I can’t remember the name, one good thing that has come from chemo related memory loss

The Maltese Falcon

This is where I get to point and laugh because the “classic” version of The Maltese Falcon is a remake—there were two previous versions before Huston tackled it.  The pre-Code 1931 version is especially fun since they were able to come right out and tell you that Sam fucks every woman in the film and didn’t have to play it coy like they did in the Huston version.

There are some films that are so time-specific that they shouldn’t be remade (like Casablanca) but, other than that, I think things should be fair game.  The problem is that “remake” usually equals lazy writing and no one really seems to try and re-imagine things.  I mean, with the Soviet Union gone for almost 20 years now, who the heck is the big scary invading force in a Red Dawn remake?  China?  Because ain’t no way al-Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist group has the manpower to take over even a small town, much less the whole Midwest.

Sorry tb, someone already remade The Shining as a TV miniseries.

The poor, dumb bastards. Did it reek like crap? That sounds like something that would reek like crap.

I’m not sure TV remakes count, though. They pretty much pillaged the canon in the 70’s as I recall- I think they did Maltese Falcon at one point. 

I wouldn’t mind a remake of Casablanca, though- I was never particularly wild about the original. George Clooney seems like the almost too obvious choice for Bogart’s role, so naturally they’d ruin it by casting Nicholas Cage.

2. If it has been remade did the remake a) suck, b) was ok on its own, or c) surpass the original in your opinion.

The remake of The Manchurian Candidate is an abomination and should be erased from this earth and from the memories of all who watched it.

“Aren’t they remaking Red Dawn?”

I read that somewhere and thought “What’s the point?” It was a movie that scored only because of the time and place, a Reagan era “Feel good” movie in which the Cold War turns hot, and a bunch of teenage amateur commandos basically save the day. To remake it today would be like doing a remake of Rambo.

The remake of The Manchurian Candidate is an abomination

Same goes for the Day of the Jackal remake, which I don’t have to have seen to know that it sucked.

The remake of Cape Fear was great for the 4 actors taking their roles beyond anything expected of them. I really was about an hour into the film before I realized That’s Nick Nolte. DeNiro’s character make the remake, basically, stand alone from an already great original.

I guess a movie begs a remake if the original version was not fully explored. The original Cape Fear did touch upon Robert Michum’s Max Cady’s insane evil, but the censors of the time kept them from making the truly scary premise that Scorsese had the luxury of making as creepy as he wanted.

On the flip side, I just saw Kubrick’s Lolita this week, and the restraint he had to show to get around the censors truly made that a creepy movie for the undertones and subtleties he resorted to. I haven’t seen the Jeremy Irons’ version yet, but I would imagine that the greater leeway afforded by a different time wouldn’t make it as edgy. I could be wrong.

Well, The Shining as a miniseries was more faithful to the book…right up until the end when Jack is supposed to take a Denver Croquet mallet to his own head to save his son and wife’s lives.  Couldn’t quite get Steven Weber to go there.

Yeah, that guy from Wings took on Jack Nicholson’s performance.

Pride and Prejudice was properly remade with Jane Ehle and Colin Firth.  Definitively remade.  Keira Knightly had no business shlepping around those grounds a couple years ago.  Doesn’t matter that it was 10 years after the miniseries.  It doesn’t need to be done again, probably ever.

I don’t think you can do The Maltese Falcon again.  It really has some odd moments, and those characters are iconic.  If you tried to do it again, you’d either make a giant boring cliche, or you’d have to make it completely different, and if you do that, then why the remake in the first place?  Just make a different movie.

The Blues Brothers cannot be remade.

George Lucas needs to stop remaking <i>Star Wars<i>.

Keira Knightly had no business shlepping around those grounds a couple years ago.

Careful, you’re dissing the woman I lust.

The remake of The Manchurian Candidate is an abomination

Is it because since the movie’s already written, there’s less labor involved in adapting it, adding newer references and new hit actors that will make it a “must” see? I just groan at most remakes because they don’t seem to bring anything new to the story. Big deal, it’s about Viet Nam War veterans instead of Korean War veterans.

At least with some the many remakes of Dracula, or Bronte novels, there’s a a fresh look at the characters, or an experimental approach to the Dracula phenomenom. What, really, is the point of remaking Oceans 11 besides making money?

BTW - where do people stand on the remaking of ‘Clash of the Titans”?

What, really, is the point of remaking Oceans 11 besides making money?

Nothing wrong with making money if you do it by producing something genuinely funny and entertaining, with more movie references and in-jokes than an average series of The Simpsons.

Plus it made Don Cheadle’s career.

Many years ago His Girl Friday was a remake of The Front Page.  It was actually an improvement.  I can’t think of any other remake that surpasses the original.  On the not to be remade list: Gone With The Wind, Casablanca, The African Queen, and 1776 (although no one cares enough to do that one).  I actually might enjoy a remake of Ella Enchanted if they actually decided to follow the book as opposed to making it a teeny bopper friendly Disneyfied movie.

Our esteemed hostess asked:

What film (or song for that matter) should not be remade on principle?

Dr Strangelove, Casablanca, Ben-Hur, The Ten Commandments, Dr Zhivago, the list is almost endless.  No songs by Jerry Lee Lewis or Roy Orbison should ever be remade.

But the impetus for remakes is simple: no one can write anything original anymore!

There was a remake/new adaptation of The Big Sleep.  More faithful to the novel than Hawks’s, but with an elderly Robert Mitchum sadly miscast.

The Phoenician asked a truly horrible question:

BTW - where do people stand on the remaking of ‘Clash of the Titans”?

Oh, gag me!  Are we talking about the flick with Harry Hamlin and the robot ow?  I was hoping they would not only not remake it, but unmake the original.

The new Star Trek should never have been made, the new Friday the 13th should never have been made, and it would be an abomination unto the Lord if someone ever tried to remake Logan’s Run.

I can think of one decent thing for remakes: if someone remade—with a lot of money put into it—the Harry Potter movies as miniseries, where they could actually do them justice.

“But the impetus for remakes is simple: no one can write anything original anymore!”
You’re implying they ever did!

No songs by Jerry Lee Lewis or Roy Orbison should ever be remade.

k.d. lang sang the fuck out of Till the Heart Caves In

Adventures in Babysitting. Just leave it alone.

Oh, gag me!  Are we talking about the flick with Harry Hamlin and the robot ow?  I was hoping they would not only not remake it, but unmake the original.

Then I have bad news for you…

The new Star Trek should never have been made…

That’s mostly true, but how awesome was the Enterprise rising like a submarine out of Titan’s atmosphere? That was so cool…it’s like a nautical metaphor for space or something. Or Spock using “live long and prosper” as a euphemism for a nasty send off?

John Carpenter’s The Thing was a considerable improvement over the previous The Thing from Another World.  The second Little Shop of Horrors surpassed the first by far.  I haven’t seen the ‘78 remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers but I’ve heard it was good.  The remake of The Fly was better than the original by far, but I’m more likely to say the second version was inspired by the first as opposed to an actual remake.  The more recent Brosnan version of The Thomas Crown Affair stands, on its own, as not a terrible film.  There was some excellent camera work and the robbery scenes were impressive, I thought the score was very good.  But the original is still better, and has Steve McQueen.  The Ladykillers wasn’t bad on its own either.

As for the sacred no one should touch: the Hitchcock library.  There was no point whatsoever to the Psycho remake, and while I can admire Christopher Reeve, his television remake of Rear Window was styless and awkward.  There’s no way to improve on his films.  The continued attempt to remake The Birds strikes me as blasphemy in an era where few if any American directors understand suspense.  I imagine the new version would have a lot of really gory CGI bird attacks.

Films which should never have been remade include the unattractive, unpleasant and poorly scored (what happened to the jazz?!) 101 Dalmatians , the amazing cast of the poorly scripted The Stepford Wives and that terrible attempt at War of the Worlds.

I remember renting the original Ocean’s 11 out of curiosity, and I was appalled at how awful it was. The original The Italian Job was not offensive, but it was kind of boring. The best remake of all time has to be Young Frankenstein, though. If that counts.

It premieres in September, so that means it will suck. September and February are when the studios dump their shit movies.

Any movie that is a product specifically of its time should never be remade.  Dr. Strangelove for instance should never be remade.

I’ve heard a remake of Robocop in the works, and that sort of bothers me.

What was a reasonably fresh theme in 1979 is now a dead horse that gets beaten again and again and again on the Disney Channel

Dear me, no.  It is a wet spot on the pavement that used to be a dead horse, on which “stars” slip whilest on their way out of rehab and straight into tabloid back-pages.

I have no television, and I must rant.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest should be left alone. It could be remade easily but it shouldn’t be and and I don’t think it will be.

If I’m not mistaken, “The Sting” was remade (Sting II?) with Jackie Gleason and Mac Davis in the lead roles. I am told it did not do well.

Thank you, Martian Sasquatch. Carpenter’s “The Thing” ought to be left alone, IMO.
I think they should remake Red Dawn, just so I can listen to Doughy Loadpants burble about how conservative films are all the rage. For all that it gets ragged on for being a jingoistic bit of flag-waving, I actually came away from it feeling like it was a profoundly anti-war film. Also, it marks the first and last time that C. Thomas Howell was considered tough.
Why anyone would consider screwing with the perfection that is “Heathers” is beyond me….
“Clash of the Titans”? ehh, it’s not like they could make it worse…
The recent “Day the earth stood still” was a travesty. Keanu Reeves should really stick cheeseball action films, and stop trying to emote. It’s almost painful to watch.
They should never mess with “1984”. John Hurt & Richard Burton. That film should be required veiwing for high school seniors.
Speaking of films that launched alot of careers, never let them mangle “Fast Times at Ridgemont High”.
I get laughed at for this, but I’m a big fan of “Conan the Barbarian”. James Earl Jones, Max Von Sydow, Mako. Awesome score by Basil Pouledoris. Some good acting, and a tight script, if you can ignore Schwarzenegger’s phonetic mumblings. Should really leave that one alone, tho I’m sure it will get regurgitated at some point.
Leave the original “Alien” alone. “Aliens” was cool, too. Burn the last two.
“Chinatown”. Please don’t mess with “Chinatown”.
Remake “The War of the Worlds” as many times as you need to to get it right. Use unknown actors who can actually act. Pay a real screenwriter, not a barnful of chimps with word processors. Fix the scientifically foolish ending (no offense, Mr. Wells, but we know more about microbiology these days. It was a fine book, Sir.)
Speaking of Mr. Wells, “The Time Machine”. Old version, great. New version fell kinda flat. Work on it.
I hate musicals, but if you felt compelled, “The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas” is looking more socially relevant every day.

I could go on like this all night. I’ll shut up now…

oh come on. You know you want to see a remake of Casablanca.

Only if Tarantino does it.

Anything with Michael Caine in the original seems to end up as a crap remake: the Stallone remake of Get Carter is awful, as is the remake of The Italian Job.

Kordo, this is for you—a legitimate appreciation of Conan.

I just groan at most remakes because they don’t seem to bring anything new to the story. Big deal, it’s about Viet Nam War veterans instead of Korean War veterans.

In this case, they’d have been better off by not fucking with the story and trying to make it new. The changes they made were gratuitous and nonsensical and cut the pain out that made the original so compelling.

But the impetus for remakes is simple: no one can write anything original anymore!

Not true—no one can get anything original produced anymore.  There are plenty of great original screenplays out there, but no studio is willing to sink money into something that’s not “pre-sold” and guaranteed to have an existing audience. 

Not to mention that Hollywood films aren’t made for American audiences anymore.  They’re made for worldwide audiences and just happen to open here first.  Studios really don’t care how films do domestically, except that it helps them do better overseas.

I like that the trailer opens with mockery of a lisping man.  That bodes well for a musical about a performing arts school.  Also, the fact that they took the title song and updated it by . . . . slowing it down. 

I like a remake.  It’s fun to see what another director or actor does with the same source material.

The problem with a remake comes when it is too faithful to the original (what’s the point) or utterly unlike the original (again, what’s the point).  It has to critique the original, identify the good elements that made it worth remaking and the bad elements that made a remake necessary, and still produce a movie that is worthwhile on its own.

The “War of the Worlds” remake was condemned above as “terrible,” but I think it’s an example of a good remake.  I found it difficult to sit through the original, and in any case, making the protagonist a brilliant scientist with a lovely assistant was trite and a cop-out; swapping him out for a working class man from New Jersey with two children was a welcome change, and one that served to underscore the existential threat posed by the attack.  That protagonist didn’t know what was happening, only that it was happening and it was probably going to kill him and his children in a very gruesome way.

As for “Red Dawn” - I thought they already remade it, only they remade it as a television series called “Jericho.”  The villain was an element within the government who, with the help of an ersatz Blackwater, used a terrorist attack to establish a fascist government in the western United States.  Which was cool! 

But apparently they’re going to do an “official” remake, wherein instead of an attack by Russia, it will be an attack by China . . . with help from Russia.  Clever.

Aww, Incertus, that was really nice of you. Thank you. I’m glad to see I’m not the only one. You made my night

Monkeyshines- I liked Soderbergh’s Solaris better than Tarkovsky’s, which has the honor of being the only film I spent the last half hour of screaming “END! END!”.

The Rocky Horror Picture Show (cue massive tangent), Tommy or Barbarella.  They’ve come perilously close to the sacrilage that would be remaking Barbarella (IIRC Drew Berrymore bought the rights and wanted to cast Lindsay Lohan, but then the whole thing was scotched.  Or perhaps that was just a terrible nightmare…)

in an era where few if any American directors understand suspense.

Ever see Hitchcock’s Rope?  Lovely little thriller that gets the murder happen in the first scene and then has the murderers hide the body in the living room while throwing a dinner party that evening.

There’s a scene where the maid is cleaning up, moving dishes into the kitchen, bringing items back to the living room.  She’s efficient, making the trip both ways count.  She’s going to discover the body.  She is.  Everyone is talking and ignoring the staff, so she will open the chest to put the books away.  She’s gonna do it.  If not this trip, the next for sure.  She’s going to find it….

And this goes on for 5 minutes.

I don’t believe there’s an American director today who could even attempt a drawn out scene like that, much less an entire movie based on anticipation and fear of discovery.  If one did, s/he certainly could never get it greenlit.  Everything now is quick cuts and CGI gore.

The 1984 from 1984 wasn’t the first time it was on film. 

I wouldn’t mind remakes of the following good films:
A Clockwork Orange (it could have Heaven 17’s music in it this time!)
Lord of the Rings (make it even longer, and yes I am ignoring the animated versions, though I did like The Hobbit cartoon version just enough to be very glad it’s getting remade)
another Robin Hood wouldn’t bother me, since the best one was an 80s BBC version and I am not sure of the take in the upcoming Russel Crowe version
Blade Runner (show more kipple! more despair!)
Gregory’s Girl (a Scottish John Hughes movie from before John Hughes movies)
Jabberwocky (something everyone should see, but probably won’t)

As for Red Dawn (not a good film, by the way,) there’s no reason to remake it since there’s so many re-enactment groups out there.  They get together for a weekend, pee in radiators, dress up, and play army.  Beer is involved, too.  At least, that’s what I see every time I go camping anywhere I don’t have to hike in.

Remaking the Pink Panther without a Kato is like remaking Star Wars without a Han Solo.  That mistake was done with the second Star Wars trilogy, and sadly the Steve Martin Clouseau will probably have a third soon enough.  The Wicker Man remake was completely unneeded.  A reimagining of Clash of the Titans could work, since the stars were stop-motion puppets in the first place.  (I’m now resisting the urge to make a comment about Lawrence Olivier, puppetry, and the idea of keeping him in a closet for many years.  Whew, glad that passed!)

If, because of some deal with the devils across the hall in the studios, television shows are going to continue to become movies, I want a Little House that shows Ma’s anti-Indian bias and some makeshift dirty living rather than dresses that look like they were bought last week at a Sears in Amish Country.  I want Rat Patrol, even if Tarantino covered that territory.  I think Barney Miller could make a great movie with the right cast.  Square Pegs could be fun if there isn’t any idiotic move to get it into modern times.  Doesn’t Gunsmoke or Bonanza have enough name recognition left?  Enough for one good movie each?  Probably not.  At least The Smurfs is getting made, though the loss of F Murray Abraham as Gargamel and his replacement with John Lithgow smells troublesome.  Not that that could have been avoided, since apparently Jeff Goldblum wanted to have a key to Smurfette’s dressing room as a condition of his contract to play the wizard.

oh come on. You know you want to see a remake of Casablanca.

Only if Tarantino does it.

With dead Nazis.  Everybody can get behind lotsa dead Nazis in a film.

They did remake Casablanca.
It’s called Barb Wire, and it stars Pamela Anderson.

Don’t watch it.
Really.
Don’t.

For the person who said The Dark is Rising books should be remade, I add The Taran Wanderer series, which Disney turned into the horrible “The Black Cauldron” could go for a remake.

As for Fame - I expect it will be terrible.

I wouldn’t mind a Casablanca remake if done well, btw.
The problem, I think, is that lots of people do remakes as a presold commodity instead of some kind of interesting take on the material.

Ooh! I have a good remake! 

“The Razor’s Edge”, starring Bill Murray. I confess I never saw the first one, but I have to say that it changed my opinion of Murray. I don’t condone book burning, but the scene with him on the mountain, burning his beloved philosophy books with that quiet little smile on his face was a revelation. The early part of the movie, World War One, and him thinking up all the worst traits of a friend who just died in order to lessen the pain of his death, was spine-tingling. Good film.

<i>Ever see Hitchcock’s Rope?  Lovely little thriller that gets the murder happen in the first scene and then has the murderers hide the body in the living room while throwing a dinner party that evening. <i>

Cool side notes about that movie. It was originally a stage play written by Patrick Hamilton (who was a pretty good novelist too) and Hitchcock made it look like it was one continuous shot, which adds to the tension in the film. It took some creative staging, considering that the cameras were fricking monsters—the extras on the dvd are well worth watching.

<quote>Ever see Hitchcock’s Rope?  Lovely little thriller that gets the murder happen in the first scene and then has the murderers hide the body in the living room while throwing a dinner party that evening.</quote>
I haven’t had the pleasure, but there’s a Hitchcock festival here every year and I’m hoping it’s slated for that.  Last time they played the various episodes from Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

<quote>I don’t believe there’s an American director today who could even attempt a drawn out scene like that, much less an entire movie based on anticipation and fear of discovery.  If one did, s/he certainly could never get it greenlit.  Everything now is quick cuts and CGI gore.</quote>
A lot of the tricks people play for suspense now are things jumping out and surprising you at quiet moments, which is fine when I’m paying $2 to go through the haunted woods at the local church, but in a film I like something with some real psychological power.
There’s a lack of anticipation, suspense and delayed gratification.  I don’t know if it’s solely the fault of people being enamored with shiny special effects, but it can’t be helping.  What was so wonderful about Hitchcock is you didn’t necessarily really know where any of it was going.  Now, even when they try to insert “suspense” it’s usually done is such a cliché that it’s not suspenseful at all.  You know exactly what’s going to happen.

I haven’t seen it yet, but didn’t Tarantino have a rather long suspenseful scene in (his remake of) Inglourious Basterds?  Long sequences still happen, though they are getting less and less common.  The “Sister Christian” sequence of Boogie Nights wasn’t one take, but it was certainly something that put many viewers on the edge of their seats.  I didn’t mind the editing in that instance.  Usually it’s just technology and editing and the simple fact that more cameras are on site that puts long sequences out of the script.  But if you really want a long scene, check out John Woo’s Hard Boiled for a sequence where bullets are going everywhere, reloading happens, there’s an elevator ride, there’s more shooting, and a whole series of behind-the-scenes things occur that make it one of the most complicated scenes in action filmdom.  That may not be saying a lot, but it is a long way of saying that directors will still do stuff that works for suspense just as other directors will do things just because they can.  Films today are far technically better than ever before, but it doesn’t necessarily make the films better.

The one that I got up in arms about was Near Dark, however that looks like it *might* be dead in the water so I will stay silent as to not tip them off again.

Not to mention that Hollywood films aren’t made for American audiences anymore.  They’re made for worldwide audiences and just happen to open here first.  Studios really don’t care how films do domestically, except that it helps them do better overseas.

Comment #54: Mnemosyne on 08/30 at 10:36 PM

Well, yes, they DO care how films do domestically, mostly because unless something is totally universal, or horror or science fiction, quite a few hollywood films can be hard to market over seas and even when totaled together a lot of countries don’t amount to the opening weekend box office of American audiences. For studios, and films like Terminator: Salvation, Transformers 2, etc. then over seas box office is the icing on the cake (or, can make a domestic flop like Terminator seem like a “hit” the same way they like to factor in DVD sales). An opening weekend in the U.K. isn’t the same as an opening weekend here and a lot of times countries like China will heavily censor or just not show American movies, depending. From what I understand, no one spends money like the American teenager, so that’s why there is an emphasis on the PG-13 films.

But you are right, studios don’t like to take chances on new films anymore and once they realized they could make money from comic-book/novel franchises that’s when we got into the era of superhero films and all the fantasy books and not to mention that the Asian horror remakes became so popular they took that ball and ran with it. I shudder to think of what Hollywood will do when they’ve exhausted the Twilight saga.

Well, yes, they DO care how films do domestically, mostly because unless something is totally universal, or horror or science fiction, quite a few hollywood films can be hard to market over seas and even when totaled together a lot of countries don’t amount to the opening weekend box office of American audiences.

I don’t think you’ve looked at international box office lately—there are plenty of films that flop in the US that make a huge profit overseas.  Even something as successful here as the latest Harry Potter film made twice as much overseas as it did domestically.

Yes, if possible they prefer films to make money both places, but if it’s a choice between a film that will do pretty well domestically but not as well internationally or a film that may flop domestically but will make a killing overseas, they’ll choose the one that will make a killing overseas every time.

For studios, and films like Terminator: Salvation, Transformers 2, etc. then over seas box office is the icing on the cake (or, can make a domestic flop like Terminator seem like a “hit” the same way they like to factor in DVD sales).

Again, when Harry Potter is making $300 million domestically and $600 million internationally, the US market is no longer the cake.  We’re the frosting.  Hollywood movies are not made for the American market anymore.

Again, when Harry Potter is making $300 million domestically and $600 million internationally, the US market is no longer the cake.  We’re the frosting.  Hollywood movies are not made for the American market anymore.

This should make the international box office returns for Marvel Studios’ upcoming Captain America pretty interesting.

Jabberwocky

OK, that would be on my “never remake” list. I can’t imagine another director even attempting the original’s hilariously medieval filth and brutality. Gilliam himself would probably pull a minor Lucas redoing it into the film he originally wanted to make if he’d had more than $200,000. Plus who are you going to get to play King Bruno the Questionable now that Max Wall is gone?

“The second Little Shop of Horrors surpassed the first by far”

Heretic!

”It was a movie that scored only because of the time and place”

True for most movies, the reason for this:

”I have seen hundreds of remakes, and can count on one hand the ones that were as good as or better than the original.”

1.)  Movie that should never be remade: Paths to Glory
2.)  Movie that cries out to be made: Paths to Glory based on the book, with the proviso that there are no homage’s to the Kubric movie

I thought that the remake of The Dawn of the Dead was pretty good, although it’s so different in tone and intent from the original, the world “remake” might not even be appropriate.

And someone mentioned The Wizard Of Oz; yes, the silent stuff shot before the Garland version was weird and horrible, even the ones where Baum himself was involved.

If I had to pick a remake to do, I’d go with The Phantom Tollbooth. Chuck Jones was a genius and all, but his version was lackluster at best.

Just a side note on The Thing. The Carpenter version is actually far far closer to the story (“Who Goes there?”) than the original movie. In fact it is very faithful for the most part, in terms of both plot and tone. The short story is morbid and disquieting. So The Thing is really less a remake of the original movie than a proper adaptation of the story.

As far movies that should never be remade, I’ll go with Sergio Leone’s first 4 Westerns.

Movies Not to Remake:  Casablanca; Breakfast at Tiffany’s; Bell, Book and Candle

Remakes that Sucked:  Sabrina; Manchurian Candidate; South Pacific (TV movie)

Remake that Was Tolerable:  Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Movie of which Only Special Effects Should Be Redone:  Vertigo

Brazil.  Just don’t do it.

All this talk of Fame reminded me of the feel-good late 80’s semi-musical Sing, which alas, will probably never make it to DVD.  Yeah, I’m a big girl and I have no taste. (And I liked the remake of The Manchurian Candidate…not enough to watch it more than once.)

I thought the Ralph Feinnes/Juliet Binoche version of Wuthering Heights was the definitive one.  It was so dark and shocking.  People I knew who had only seen the Timothy Dalton version and had never read the book were shocked out of their heads by Feinnes’ Heathcliff.  I was so excited to see a version in which Heathcliff and Catherine were portrayed as they really were in the book.

asbo wrote:

They’ve come perilously close to the sacrilage that would be remaking Barbarella (IIRC Drew Berrymore bought the rights and wanted to cast Lindsay Lohan, but then the whole thing was scotched.  Or perhaps that was just a terrible nightmare…)

I don’t know if you could ever do it campily enough again—Elaine and I still refer to our bed as the water matmos—but I’d probably actually go to see a Lindsey Lohan remake of Barbarella, though Drew Barrymore would probably be the better star for it.

You’ll know things have really gotten strange when they remake it starring Miley Cyrus.

I can’t believe the number of people who think Red Dawn was a “feel good” movie.  D

id we see the same film?  The one where almost everyone is dead at the end?  The one with blood and betrayal and assasination?  The one where the most ethical and sympathetic character was the Cuban officer?

Also, the new Italian Job was really a sequel, not a remake.  I liked them both.

Conan the Barbarian?  Okay, score was good and JEJ was amazing (as always).  But I really preferrred Red Sonya.

Rocky Horror Picture so has a life of its own, still, so should NOT be messed with.  Ever.

My favorite remake of Pride & Predj is the Bollywood musical version.

“Sorry tb, someone already remade The Shining as a TV miniseries.”

That someone was Stephen King, who’s supposed to have never liked the Kubrick version. I like Stephen King, but fuck’s sake. You can probably replace Jack Nicholson at the height of his powers with Stephen Weber and it’ll be fine, good idea King. Do that.

“I read that somewhere and thought “What’s the point?” It was a movie that scored only because of the time and place, a Reagan era “Feel good” movie in which the Cold War turns hot, and a bunch of teenage amateur commandos basically save the day. To remake it today would be like doing a remake of Rambo.”

If they had a pair, they’d set it in Iraq. Michael Ironside can cameo as an ayatollah in a nod to the original.

I don’t sweat remakes, really. Someone’s supposed to have commiserated to Raymond Chandler that Hollywood was ruining his novels with their bad adaptations. Chandlers led the guy into his study and pointed at the books on the shelf and said. “No, look. They’re all fine.”

That said, my list of things of movies/TV that are pretty much perfect and/or just shouldn’t be messed with in any manner:
“Alien(s)”
“Anatomy of a Murder”
“Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan”
“Fargo”
“Roman Holiday”
“Buffy the Vampire Slayer” (TV version, obv.)
“The Wire”
“Dr. Strangelove”
“Say Anything”
“The Terminator(2)”
“Starship Troopers”
“Lonesome Dove”
“The Limey”

Conan the Barbarian?  Okay, score was good and JEJ was amazing (as always).  But I really preferrred Red Sonya.

Not me. I thought CtB did as good a job of capturing the feel of the original works as any high fantasy film ever has. Only LotR can match it in that regard IMHO. And it didn’t layer it with a smidgen of fluff. No comic relief, no annoying kid actors, sparse dialog (Conan never says a word to Valeria after “You’re not a gaurd” when they first meet), spot-on perfect casting and locations and, as you mention, one of the finest scores in movie history.

Red Sonja? No. Ator La Invinciblé 2 did the same story and did it better. No raging homophobia and no lame mullet. Not “no mullet”, just that Miles O’Keef had a much better mullet than Brigette Nielson. And at least you can watch that one with Joel & The Bots helping you lampoon it (as Cave Dwellers).

Movie of which Only Special Effects Should Be Redone:  Vertigo
Waitwaitwaitwaitiwait.  What special effects are you talking about here?  The brilliant zoom/tracking shots? The “scene-change” spinning platform?  The dream sequence?  Do you want to replace the matte-painted tower with CGI?
Vertigo is one of the greatest works of art of the 20th century.  You might be able to make a much more straight-ahead adaptation of D’Entre les Morts, but tinkering with an artistic achievement like Vertigo seems like a terrible idea to me.

The problem with Vertigo is that the visual iconography Hitchcock invented has been used to excess by everyone who followed him.  I remember being horribly disappointed as a teen seeing Vertigo re-released b/c I was bored at how long the dream sequences and spinning and other effects took.  It seemed very cliched, even though I knew I was seeing the original

“I got it already!  Stop beating me over the head with the psychological stuff!”

Should not be remade.  It’s only lessened by being copied so much.

South Pacific if they could get the color screens out of it.  Yes, color movies are super duper!  But the color wash wasn’t quite as effective as hoped for, and is just annoying today.

I would like Hollywood to go one whole year without remaking anything.

Magis wrote:

I would like Hollywood to go one whole year without remaking anything.

And I want to win the lottery; which one has the better odds?

smartalek:  he said remade, not made.

Can’t remake “A Hard Day’s Night,” for obvious reasons.

And I fucking loved “Sorcerer” when I saw it in the theater as a teen when it first was released.  Such a French ending.

Yes, I’d like Hitchcock’s camera work redone with CGI; hopefully it could be as smart but smoother.  Sometimes it bothers my eyes/perception and I don’t enjoy the movie as much.

<blockquote>And I want to win the lottery; which one has the better odds?</i>

I’d buy that ticket today.

The diversity of religion, color, ethnicity, shape and size of the kids was much the same as well. In fact, Stuyvesant was probably a lot more diverse back in that time than it is today; I wonder if the now-Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music & Art and Performing Arts is as diverse.

Pam,

Stuy was a little more than 50% Asian/Asian-American when I was there in the early-mid ‘90s.  Read on wikipedia that it is now around 62% and from my last visit there….seems more white and middle/upper class than I remembered it.

A remake of the Wicker Man might have value, as I understand it, because the original director’s cut no longer exists. Obviously nobody has made one yet so please don’t tell me otherwise.

Hypothetically speaking,  a remake of “The Wicker Man” might be so bad that it was hilarious. It could happen.

“Hypothetically speaking, a remake of “The Wicker Man” might be so bad that it was hilarious. It could happen.”

...or, it might be so mind-numbingly bad, you’d feel like suing the film company to get the time spent watching it back.  Hypothetically, of course. 

I mean, hypothetically again, just imagine if someone cast Nicolas Cage in such a hypothetical monstrosity, hypothetically?  Can you imagine what the result might be, hypothetically?...

I absolutely loathed Jack Nicholson’s performance in The Shining, thought he killed any and all subtlety and sympathy in Jack Torrance, but even I will concur that the miniseries made its own series of mistakes.  That said, I would kill for a really good 4-hour miniseries of Christine.  My general feeling on remakes is that they stand about as much chance of being good or awful as any other movie.  Zombie’s Halloween is awful because, well, it’s a Zombie movie, but the new Nightmare on Elm Street looks like it has potential.

That said, Little Shop of Horrors is probably in the category of “Better than the Original”

The heresy is spreading

The heresy is spreading

Add me as a heretic who believes the 1980’s remake was better than the original.

There’s never an inquisition around when you need one

There’s never an inquisition around when you need one

They were eaten by Audrey II after the 1986 remake.  Being the starring plant does have its privileges, after all…..

I hope no one ever gets the bright idea to screw with Touch of Evil.
As for the worst remake ever, my money is on City of Angels, which shat all over the beautiful Wings of Desire.
The people responsible for that cannot suffer enough.

Caren, “To be or not to be” is also a cliche, but I don’t think it would make sense to re-write Hamlet because people have come to think that a teen having an identity crises is hackneyed.

Well, I also can’t stand Hamlet, that hypocritical, whining coward forever looking for excuses not to do anything.

Vertigo is weird flick.  The effects *do* take too long, considering the visual shorthand we learn as small children through TV today. 

But as above, I don’t think it shoudl be remade.  CGI and shorter takes wouldn’t improve it.  The protagonist is a thoroughly unlikable character, but played by Jimmy Fucking Stewart, who is immediately likable and trustworthy, so you try to go along with his obsession instead of just seeing him for the weirdo he is.

The murder (and murderer) in that story is almost incidental.

“As for the worst remake ever, my money is on City of Angels, which shat all over the beautiful Wings of Desire.”

Is it really a remake if they change the title?  or is it a rip-off/homage?

for example is The Magnificent Seven concidered a “remake” of The Seven Samurai?

Although the original “Kiss of Death” was overall crappy, anybody who thinks they can do Tommy Udo better than Richard Widmark should have his head examined

Any body who would try to replace Barbara Stanwyck in Double Indemnity should be shot

Any body who would try to replace Barbara Stanwyck in Ball of Fire, Baby Face, or Night Nurse should be hung, drawn, and quartered

then shot

While we’re on Shakespeare…

Laurence Fishburne’s “Othello” is the class of the strict-script field, hands down. I thought “Romeo & Juliet”, the DiCaprio/Danes version, had some bright spots (Is it me, or does Claire Danes only have two facial expressions? Doe-eyed blankness & “My puppy just got run over” shock).

I don’t have anything against modern re-workings of Shakespeare’s work, but if you’re going to update the language, it’s vital to have a deep appreciation of the story. A modern MacBeth has been attempted by every to have graduated film school for the last 50 years. I’d love to see an updated “Richard III”, or “King Lear”. I’m sure I’m forgetting some of the films that fall into this category. Anyone got some good titles in mind?

Kordo:  Isn’t this an updated version of Richard III?

Eff Shakespeare, hack that he was. The Ode to Joy—now there’s a work for the ages, and it seems somehow to attract every snot-faced fifteen-year-old moron who gets a copy of Pro Tools for Christmas. Drag the lot of ‘em out to be shot in the street, says I.

A little late to this party, but:

Casablanca (one of my favorites) could never be remade because the plot was so thin it took that cast to make a good movie out of it. 

Worst remake of all time?  Steisand/Kristoferson in “A Star is Born.”

Nah, as mentioned Barb Wire, as the remake of Casablanca is just plain awful.  There is exactly one five second spot in the entire movie where you can buy the premise, and then it’s gone.

I think the Peter Jackson King Kong is well worth it by being far truer to the original.  The 1976 version sucks.  Note mine is a minority opinion (well, not about the 1976 one).  Of course, I tend to watch the Kong vs V. rex scene over and over and over…

The ‘78 Invasion of the Body Snatchers was better than the original from 1956.  Most people who think the original Ocean’s Eleven is better probably haven’t actually seen it for a while.

“The ‘78 Invasion of the Body Snatchers was better than the original from 1956”

I dont agree, without the red scare background the willing suspension of belief gets streached too far