Question regarding Remakes

Having read the thread about the remaking of the Birds, a question popped into my head:

Has there been any good remakes of films in the past decade, let alone in the past year? The only one that comes to mind is the Departed, which was a remake (of sorts) of "Internal Affairs" (which I have yet to see)

Necronomicon

Dawn of The Dead was fantastic in my opinion. The director really made it his own, practically changed its genre.
I also enjoyed Alexandre Aja's take on The Hills Have Eyes (even though I haven't seen the original).
I can't really think of any others at the moment, I liked the Omen remake when I saw it. I hadn't seen the original. When I got my hands on the original though, my estimation went down somewhat, as it's really just a frame by frame copy.

FINALLY going to see The Departed tonight. Gonna try to squeeze in Infernal Affairs before I go, been ages since I've watched it.

J.R.HARTLEY

i thought Batman Begins was a good remake of batman, Demilles 50's Ten Commandments is easier to enjoy than the original although the original is still very good, and i think the tyrone power Mark of zorro is better than the Douglas Fairbanks version, also Dracula:Love never dies was the best Dracula film since nosferatu and the bela lugosi Dracula

Lurk

I really liked the remake of Planet of the Apes, even though loads of people thought it was rubbish. The action sequences and the ape makeup/body movements did it for me. Can't really think of too many other good remakes; perhaps Cape Fear?

Brow

The Hills Have Eyes is a good one as is Dawn Of the Dead. With regards to ten years? Hmmm....

Ones that come to mind, ( some may not come close to the original but were enjoyable none the less in my opinion!) include:
Charlie And the Chocolate Factory,
King Kong
The Nutty Professor
Red Dragon....

eh...thats all I can think of. Pretty poor actually. The originals all beat them! Except maybe in Kongs case...

BlitzKrieg

King kong was average at best.

Cant think of many in the last 10 years, but in the 80s there were The Thing and The Fly, both excellent remakes.

J.R.HARTLEY

Brow wrote:

The Hills Have Eyes is a good one as is Dawn Of the Dead. With regards to ten years? Hmmm....

Ones that come to mind, ( some may not come close to the original but were enjoyable none the less in my opinion!) include:
Charlie And the Chocolate Factory,
King Kong
The Nutty Professor
Red Dragon....

eh...thats all I can think of. Pretty poor actually. The originals all beat them! Except maybe in Kongs case...

have to say as a big roald dahl fan that i always held the willy wonka film as a travesty to his writing, even dahl didn't like it, he withdrew permission to use the proper title. i thought Charlie.... was superior in regards to the story

Vokes

I actually thought the Assault on Precinct 13 remake with Ethan Hawke and Laurence Fishburne was very good.

sonic juice

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers (2001/2002)
The Lord of the Rings (1978)

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
The Return of the King (1980)

The Mummy (1999)
The Mummy (1932)

Ocean's Eleven (2001)
Ocean's Eleven (1960)

The Thin Red Line (1998)
The Thin Red Line (1964)

Twelve Monkeys (1995)
La Jetée (1962)

I suppose it depends on the person which version they incline towards.

sonic juice

Also I think there was something like 'A history of violence' 2005, directed by David Cronenberg around the first half of the last century.

Brow

King kong was average at best.

Did you prefer the original more?

have to say as a big roald dahl fan that i always held the willy wonka film as a travesty to his writing, even dahl didn't like it, he withdrew permission to use the proper title. i thought Charlie.... was superior in regards to the story

Totally agree on some points. Its hard to pick one over the other though in my opinion. The newer one was much more accurate in terms of the text and all but I just didnt like some elements of the new one. I didnt really like Depps Wonka. Maybe a second viewing would change my mind though.

Wacker

J.R.HARTLEY wrote:

i thought Batman Begins was a good remake of batman, Demilles 50's Ten Commandments is easier to enjoy than the original although the original is still very good, and i think the tyrone power Mark of zorro is better than the Douglas Fairbanks version, also Dracula:Love never dies was the best Dracula film since nosferatu and the bela lugosi Dracula

Woah, woah, woah! Hold up there! Batman Begins was not a remake of Batman! It is the start to a new Batman franchise alright, that doesn't make it a remake! It is no more a remake of Batman than Batman was a movie adaptation of the Batman series from the sixties starring Adam West. Hope I don't come across as jumping down your throat here; that is not my intention.

TheFredJ

John McTiernan's take on The Thomas Crown Affair is better than Norman Jewison, even despite Pierce Brosnan being no Steve McQueen.

But surely everyone's fave remake has to be Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot remake of Hitchcock's Psycho (Hitch is clearly a fave for remakers with atleasta couple of dozen remakes out there - including The Man Who Knew Too Much, which Hitch thought was so good he made it twice).

TheFredJ

similar to van sant dong hitchcock, and hitchcock doing hitchcock, but not quite a remake and yet probably the ultimate remake, how about paul schrader vs renny harlin on dominion: prequel to the exorcist and exorcist iv: the begining? how many times do you get a chance to see two directors working with more or less the same script, cast and crew?

Lurk

TheFredJ wrote:

similar to van sant dong hitchcock, and hitchcock doing hitchcock, but not quite a remake and yet probably the ultimate remake, how about paul schrader vs renny harlin on dominion: prequel to the exorcist and exorcist iv: the begining? how many times do you get a chance to see two directors working with more or less the same script, cast and crew?

I didn't bother seeing either because the reviews were so damning. I've just read this in imbd:

Morgan Creek Productions fired Paul Schrader after he had submitted a completed movie, saying that he had given them "footage without any of the bloody violence the backers had wanted". He had already made it clear in interviews that he was making more of a psychological drama than an all-out gore-fest. He was fired and Renny Harlin was hired to re-shoot the movie. Almost 90% of the movie was re-shot and at least two characters have been dropped from Paul Schrader's version of the movie. Following the lackluster reception to Harlin's version, though, Schrader's version was finally released as Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist (2005).

I'd prefer the psychological drama, so Schrader's might appeal to me more. In any case, I doubt if either would surpass the original. I know quite a few folks in their 30s and 40s who still can't watch it a second time!

(edit: imdb even, but sure nobody noticed)

circuit

You really know your stuff Lurk (snigger)

TheFredJ

Lurk wrote:

In any case, I doubt if either would surpass the original.

let's not confuse sequels/prequels with remakes.

Lurk

TheFredJ wrote:

let's not confuse sequels/prequels with remakes.

he, he, sorry...just saw that now.

You really know your stuff Lurk (snigger)

why thank you, I'm sh-ua

circuit

Honestly Lurk. I have seen you in many forums. I think you are swell.:cool:

Lurk

why thank you again, circuit. i look forward to reading your future posts and finding out that you're actually someone i already know under a different handle

BlitzKrieg

Did you prefer the original more?

actually yes I did. I found Jackson's King Kong tried to turn what was essentially a 45 minute monster movie into something its not and as such I find the originally king kong to be more entertaining (withstanding the obvious difficulties in the different eras.)

Also

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers (2001/2002)
The Lord of the Rings (1978)

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
The Return of the King (1980)

Not remakes but different adaptations of the same source material, same can be said for charlie and the chocolate factory and a few other films named here.

Brow

actually yes I did. I found Jackson's King Kong tried to turn what was essentially a 45 minute monster movie into something its not and as such I find the originally king kong to be more entertaining (withstanding the obvious difficulties in the different eras.)

I wasnt trying to be smart, i was just wondering in case that was interpretted wrong.

When i tried googling stuff I was suprised by some films that were remade. The 'bourne identity' for one.

J.R.HARTLEY

Wacker wrote:

Woah, woah, woah! Hold up there! Batman Begins was not a remake of Batman! It is the start to a new Batman franchise alright, that doesn't make it a remake! It is no more a remake of Batman than Batman was a movie adaptation of the Batman series from the sixties starring Adam West. Hope I don't come across as jumping down your throat here; that is not my intention.

yeah i understand where your coming from but i mean it as in it's a remake of the batman story, granted a lot of the characters are very different, but both films deal with his emergence, massive stretch i know.

Playboy

The remake of the Ring was better far better than the original. I know everyone says the original was superior but it wasnt (and we know why most ppl say this :rolleyes: ) ... I like asian cinema as much as the next guy but the original was dull and flat

Found this on google. It's basically the box-office figures for most remade movies and comparing it to its original.

Anyways, I enjoyed King Kong. Bit lengthy but enjoyable nonetheless.

J.R.HARTLEY

noticed on that sight that they are remaking 3.10 to yuma
they'll need great actors cause it's a western but it's entirely based on the two main characters and relies heavily on the two actors Van Heflin and the late great Glenn Ford, i can't wait to see a new western.Open Range was the last decent western.
just checked there's a cast list on imdb for the remake, Christian Bale is doing Van Heflins role and Russell Crowe is in Glenn Fords Role, could be very good.

Karl Hungus

There's been some excellent remakes over the years:

The Fly
The Thing
Invasion Of The Body Snatchers
Dawn Of The Dead
The Happiness of the Katakuris

Playboy wrote:

The remake of the Ring was better far better than the original. I know everyone says the original was superior but it wasnt (and we know why most ppl say this :rolleyes: ) ... I like asian cinema as much as the next guy but the original was dull and flat

No, why don't you tell us why most "ppl" say this?

qwertplaywert

meine favourite remakes....
batman returns
the mummy
the ring
Cruel Intentions

Wacker

qwertplaywert wrote:

meine favourite remakes....
batman returns
the mummy
the ring
Cruel Intentions

Oh dear, here I go again, but Batman Returns? That wasn't a remake!

LundiMardi

Batman Returns wasnt a remake, it's a prequel, it's all quite obvious really...

But as others have said, Dawn of the Dead ruled!!! As did ''The Hills Have Eyes''.

edit: oops, i meant batman begins... i guess i should read **** before replying

Vokes

Wait...Batman Returns is a sequel, no? im confused now

Karl Hungus

It's Batman Begins, you cretins!

Playboy

Karl Hungus wrote:

No, why don't you tell us why most "ppl" say this?

Insecurity

Karl Hungus

Playboy wrote:

Insecurity

I'm afraid I don't follow, can you elaborate?

Lurk

Is there a filthy durty nudey scene in the original?

Playboy

Karl Hungus wrote:

I'm afraid I don't follow, can you elaborate?

People feel the need to make themselves appear a certain way in order to get percieved affirmation so they often say that they like things when in fact they don't. This seems to happen a lot in regards to music & movies. An insecure person feels that if they associate themselves with obscure, intellectual or critically acclaimed music or movies that they will some how appear more 'intelligent' or 'cool' to their peers. I'm not saying everybody does this but certainly a large portion of youger people do. There are certain people on these boards who are genuinely passionate about asian cinema but because of the perceived status of these individuals, lots of other individuals have started mimicking their opinions and views in regards to all things asian.

Hope that clear things up

Lurk

won't be watching that then

SofaKing

SofaKing wrote:

Wait...Batman Returns is a sequel, no? im confused now

Superman Returns and Batman Begins. Easy to get the 2 confused though.

I really did enjoy the remake of the Fly .. though I never knew the Thing was a remake ..

Ohh.. just read the review of it on IMDb ..

Remake of the classic 1951 "The Thing From Another World"

. Wow, you learn something new every day

Karl Hungus

Playboy wrote:

People feel the need to make themselves appear a certain way in order to get percieved affirmation so they often say that they like things when in fact they don't. This seems to happen a lot in regards to music & movies. An insecure person feels that if they associate themselves with obscure, intellectual or critically acclaimed music or movies that they will some how appear more 'intelligent' or 'cool' to their peers. I'm not saying everybody does this but certainly a large portion of youger people do. There are certain people on these boards who are genuinely passionate about asian cinema but because of the perceived status of these individuals, lots of other individuals have started mimicking their opinions and views in regards to all things asian.

Hope that clear things up

Clears things up considerably.

While there's certainly a phenomena of people who might prefer something simply because it's Japanese, such as guys who watch Sailor Moon, but I don't think I would have ever called it insecurity. Personal preference maybe, like people who love the Friday The 13th films for example, which are not exactly great film as such and will never be as highly esteemed in critical or intellectual terms as a Coen Brother's film, but yet there are plenty of people who would far prefer a good slasher. Does this make them insecure and trying to make up for something or boost their status?

As for Ring, I'd hardly call it obscure at this stage. I consider it a far, far superior film to the remake, and that hardly has anything to do with my status, it's because I do genuinely believe the original is the better film. Why? Because it was such an incredibly atmospheric movie.

I suppose it would all depend on whether or not you prefer a slow-burning horror film, but one example I could give is if you compare the endings of both films

In the original, the scene where Sadako crawls out of the TV is just one continual shot and it builds up ever so slowly, it's one of the most thoroughly creepy things I've ever seen and had me edging back in my seat when watching it. The same scene in the remake is much shorter, uses a lot of CGI effects, and intersected with the Naomi Watts character racing to the apartment in her car. It just doesn't have any of the tension of the original.

J.R.HARTLEY

LundiMardi wrote:

Batman Returns wasnt a remake, it's a prequel, it's all quite obvious really...

But as others have said, Dawn of the Dead ruled!!! As did ''The Hills Have Eyes''.

edit: oops, i meant batman begins... i guess i should read **** before replying

afraid not lundimardi if you watch batman 1989 again you'll see it deals with the emergence of the batman, just as Batman Begins does, it's a complete reimagining of the story and is in no way a prequel as the sequel to Begins has been announced and will deal with the joker also.

Sad Professor

Most remakes are fairly pointless IMO. Although there have been a few worthy ones:

The Last of the Mohicans
Scarface
The Manchurian Candidate

and others I can't think of.

Wacker

J.R.HARTLEY wrote:

afraid not lundimardi if you watch batman 1989 again you'll see it deals with the emergence of the batman, just as Batman Begins does, it's a complete reimagining of the story and is in no way a prequel as the sequel to Begins has been announced and will deal with the joker also.

Cheers for that J.R. Hartley; as if you hadn't spoken up I'd have had to, which would make me look truly ridiculous. Correcting people twice about Batman films not being remakes is bad enough, but three times would have been ludicrous. Once more for the record though:

Batman Begins was NOT a remake of Batman. Batman Begins was NOT a prequel to Batman. Now, lets move on!