PDA

View Full Version : Remakes


Hellbilly
11-06-2002, 12:59 PM
Do we really need them? What's your opinion?

rhett
11-06-2002, 05:23 PM
Hollywood remakes have brought us THE THING, THE RING, INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, INSOMNIA, CAT PEOPLE, and NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. There are many more classics too, and that is why I think remakes are great.

betterdan
11-06-2002, 05:47 PM
I voted no don't fuck with em. True there have been a few remakes that were decent and that's ok but just leave em the fuck alone and come up with something else for crying out loud!

DefJeff
11-06-2002, 06:43 PM
i just voted "it depends" sometimes they are good sometimes they blow

Yowie
11-06-2002, 10:19 PM
I don't understand all this updating business. Remakes are mostly misses in my opinion, so I voted to leave the classics alone and not even try. The remake of "The Thing" may be better than the original, but surely the original "Cat People" and NOTLD are better than the remakes, I would say. Same goes for "Planet Of The Apes" and "Nosferatu", IMO. -There may be an exception; if they remake "Scream" in 25 years they might get it right. :D

KillerCannabis
11-07-2002, 08:53 AM
It depends......... some remakes really suck or just should never be done (TCM, Dawn of the Dead), but others give birth to horror classics, such as The Thing and Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

hell ya!
11-07-2002, 09:38 PM
It depends............

McBride_01
11-11-2002, 12:30 PM
Don't FUCK with them!!! I'd much rather them re-release the originals that to give us their shitty remakes!

I did like Carpenter's THE THING and NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD: 1990, but those both had great people involved that loved the originals.

PSYCHO we didn't need.
THE RING was just okay compared to the original.
The makers of TCM and DAWN OF THE DEAD remakes should be gutted and burnt alive.

CJ
11-11-2002, 09:07 PM
I am not against remakes at all, as long as there is a genuine case for updating or improving upon them.

Some films should be left well alone.

Jamm
11-11-2002, 10:29 PM
There ought to be a time limit, say 30 years, before a movie should be allowed to be re-made.

Zodiac-Mindwarp
11-12-2002, 12:50 AM
I would have to say that it depends.
Some of the remakes have become classics in their own right, however there are very few of them. Most of them are junk, just the studios trying to make a buck from a well known name.
To be totally honest, I still can not believe that they are remaking Dawn Of The Dead. God only knows what they will remake next.

Yowie
11-12-2002, 08:32 AM
Hey, who voted "who gives a shit ?", BTW ?.:lol: :eek2: :p

BlazingMagnum
11-14-2002, 01:34 PM
:fire:REMAKES:fire:


The Hollywood re-make factory sucks very big things! The odd movie slips through the net - like The Thing, and even that was made 20 years ago!
The Fly was okay - but most of them can blow me! I don't know why people don't write original scripts anymore - instead of scraping up potential profits by raking over old news.
Dino De Laurentis can kiss my ass.

betterdan
11-14-2002, 01:46 PM
Well said

The Chaostar
11-19-2002, 09:30 AM
Just for the sake of THE THING I voted "It depends"...

torgo
11-19-2002, 09:21 PM
I said it depends, I've not liked some remakes(like Psycho), and I've loved some remakes as much as the originals-(The Thing, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Nosferatu)....some I've enjoyed, but no where near as much as the originals(like Night of the Living Dead).....I don't think they should remake Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but I'll still give it a shot....it can't be any worse than Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation.

onebyone
11-20-2002, 04:05 AM
Don't mess with the classics ever. That Psycho remake taught me that. :fire:

thrashard76
11-20-2002, 06:36 AM
Example: NOTLD 90 was a great remake. It kept with the original idea without betraying the classic. So I guess remakes are good but they have to respect the past to pass for a good modern day remake. Bring on the gore!

mcchrist
11-20-2002, 09:35 AM
Remakes have their place. Psycho was a mess from the very beginning, what's the point of doing a shot-for-shot remake in the first place? Its like whenever I hear a band covering an old tune, what's the point if it sounds just like the original? John Carpenter did it right with The Thing (and I support VOTD as well) and Savini's NOTLD showed that there is always room for improvement. I don't necessarily love remakes, but I'm not going to hate them for existing either.