what is the best or worst remake ?

Discussion in 'Reader Polls' started by steve_p, Apr 23, 2003.

  1. thing

    thing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    New Zealand
    I don't really consider The Thing a remake, it simply is a more accurate telling of the source material, it did not take anything from the earlier film that also adapted (loosely) the source material except for the font of the titles (its lone homage)
     
  2. thing

    thing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    New Zealand
    A Fistful of Dollars is a pretty good remake although I prefer Yojimbo
    I prefer the Fright Night remake to the original.

    Worst would have to he Halloween or Planet of the Apes
     
  3. DVD-fanatic-9

    DVD-fanatic-9 And the Next Morning, When the Campers Woke Up...

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,079
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    Fair enough.


    I still haven't seen it yet. But, I think a good deal of people underrate the original. So the remake would have to be one hell of a damn movie. Rather than just a tolerable comedic cash-in on the Twilight fad with a slightly older stud in the Robert Pattinson / Taylor Lautner seductive monster-man slot.
     
  4. thing

    thing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Well I have never liked the original and have generally found it quite beloved by people so to me its not underrated. Upon reading about the remake (which i enjoyed) i found it bombed despite generally great reviews and people seem to blame it on horror-remake fatigue as it came out after a glut of poor horror remakes so was never given a chance.
    It certainly has a few problems including some bad cgi here and there but I think it was well cast and quite a good watch.
     
  5. Workshed

    Workshed a.k.a. Villyan Shit

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,626
    Likes Received:
    1,295
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    London
    Best: The Ring
    Worst: The Shining TV adaptation (closer to the book, yes; in any way fun, scary, or well-executed? no.)
     
  6. buck135

    buck135 Kanamit

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,246
    Likes Received:
    930
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    A dimension of sight, sound and mind.
    The Fog. I have nothing more to add, other than it's painful to remember that the film even exists.
     
    DVD-fanatic-9 likes this.
  7. Natas

    Natas Theres no such thing as the boogyman

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,288
    Likes Received:
    997
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Texas
    Awesome, entertaining, badass remakes:

    Texas Chainsaw Massacre
    Black Christmas (rewatched again over the weekend and had a blast. Movie is awesome)
    Amityville Horror
    The Thing
    Dawn of the Dead
    The Hills have Eyes
    Halloween
    Piranha 3D
    My Bloody Valentine
    Evil Dead
    Night of the Living Dead
    The Fly
    I Spit on your Grave
    Thirteen Ghosts
    2001 Maniacs
    Cape Fear (debatable "horror" but a movie worth mentioning nevertheless)


    Shitty, waste of time remakes:

    Nightmare on Elm Street
    Last House on the Left
    The Ring (I'll never understand the love for this flick. Aside from a creepy sequence or two, movie fucking blows)
    Prom Night
    Psycho
    House of Wax
    The Grudge

    Somewhere in between:

    Friday the 13th
    The Crazies
    Maniac
    Funny Games
    Night of the Demons (2009)
    Carrie
    The Thing (2011)
    The Toolbox Murders
     
  8. fattyjoe37

    fattyjoe37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes Received:
    346
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    WA
    Obviously the 80s holy trinity of remakes (The Thing, The Fly, The Blob) still stands tall. So leaving those out I'd say:

    Best - Willard
    Worst - The Fog
     
  9. DVD-fanatic-9

    DVD-fanatic-9 And the Next Morning, When the Campers Woke Up...

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,079
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    (I double-posted on the last page. I feel weird whenever I do that, so I'm going to keep one and re-post the other as a general response to everyone's choices and the topic as a whole.)

    Obviously, I'm down with all the 80's remakes which proved that you can't really have a quality film without a vision. I still have issues with Carpenter's Thing but Carpenter had in his mind an actual vision and in '82, he was still a filmmaker of substance. I don't know what happened to him after Big Trouble in Little China. I really don't.

    Although, I also think whatever happened to him is close to what happened to remakes in general. I stop supporting the notion that remakes as a group had a real purpose with 1988's The Blob. Which was just an update to brag about how much better special effects were. Fittingly, that same year's Killer Klowns from Outer Space used a lot of the framework of the story from the original Blob and was a vastly more interesting, original, thoughtful, and valid horror film than the official Columbia-made Hollywood remake. Which outright stole the government conspiracy / endangering 'the public' subplots from Piranha, Alien, and C.H.U.D. (This was pretty surprising too, since Chuck Russell and Frank Darabont made it right after Nightmare on Elm Street 3 - and, yeah, I still have a bit of affection for that sequel like most horror fans do - that they were so lazy as to just ripoff most of their film, defer it to trends.)

    After that, it's Night of the Living Dead 1990 (Columbia striking again) and by that point, nobody cares about remakes. How could anyone in a year of films like Misery, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, Tremors, Hardware, Arachnophobia, Gremlins 2: The New Batch, There's Nothing Out There, Def by Temptation, Troll 2 think remakes fit in, at all? It's clearly a year of genre reflexivity. It's not a time for giant hollow machines with no thought behind them; hence why both Jason and Freddy took the year off (and why Freddy's next film was packed with references to things like Twin Peaks, The Wizard of Oz, Videodrome, Looney Tunes, Carnival of Souls- etc), Chucky returned with a complete tonal makeover (in what could be described as a flatout horror-comedy), Mick Garris follows up Critters 2 with a quasi-meditative Norman Bates' origin story. Etc.

    I don't think people get that remakes have to work with the times in which they boom in. They can't be reactions to trends. When remakes first really boomed as business in the early 80's, the most comparable out-of-control trend going on was remakes of Dracula / Nosferatu (which were numerous enough in the 70's to call an actual boom). Sequels were scattered (Exorcist II, Jaws 2, Damien: Omen II, It Lives Again, Dawn of the Dead). The cut-and-paste holiday slasher trend was only just getting started, so critics had yet to react to it / the public had yet to recognize that it was a thing. Thanks to directors like Werner Herzog and Philip Kaufman, remakes at that point had a strong reputation. Not just anybody was doing them. They didn't stink of conveyor belt processing. In 1999, when they boomed again (House on Haunted Hill, The Haunting, The Mummy), it was clear that it was a natural extension of Hollywood's then-love affair with adaptations / remakes in comedy and action like Lost in Space, The Avengers, Godzilla, The Saint, George of the Jungle, Galaxy Quest, The Phantom Menace, The Parent Trap, Mask of Zorro, etc. (Technically, a film adaptation of a television show - especially if made decades after the original - is a form of remake.)

    Hence: a perfect example of how modern remakes are nothing but a reaction-to something odious that Hollywood was just doing at the time. (Their typical attitude of: whatever makes money.) The horror remakes of the last nearly 20 years as a trend haven't had a shred of artistic significance to them. Hence, why the genre has suffered for them. It's no coincidence that Zack Snyder is one of the most prolific, successful franchise guys today and made his name off an action remake of one of horror's most vital artistic achievements in history. (Film history- not just genre history.) Also no coincidence that Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes is responsible for making so many horror remakes. Worst of all is the way so many horror fans refuse to see that when remakes become a trend in/of themselves, they cease to be a valid form of filmmaking and become utterly cancerous to horror. For perfect proof that I'm right: look at how the 80's sequel boom impacted the 1990's and how little respect fans on this board have for the 1990's in horror. It may be difficult but it's nonetheless essential to admit: remakes in bulk are bad and adversely affected the 2000's- making them another overall lousy decade for horror.

    All this only makes the 70's and early-to-mid 80's remakes such as The Fly, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Cat People even stronger / more valid films.

    Also... can't put this plainly enough: Rob Zombie was the only director of the last 20 or so years with an actual concept for making his remakes of Halloween personal films with some semblance of art to them. (Which at that time was a huge deal but, really, who knew that the guy would wind up being such a historically important filmmaker in the genre? There are serious, high-brow critics who think his Halloween II is one of the greatest films ever made. Literal thinkpieces have been written about it. Don't be surprised if one day Criterion shows an interest in Zombie, if they haven't already.) (I'm dead serious.)

    99% of remakes just suck.
     

Share This Page