Post subject: Movie: Omen; But on a larger scale, Remakes
Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 12:59 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:53 am Posts: 6207
Why is Hollywood taking classic horror movies and redoing them with their fancy shmancy effects? Why don't they just pull the original film out of the vaults and take a steaming hot dump all over it.
What do you think of movie remakes? I know there have been some pretty successful attempts, but I don't think anything will do an original classic any justice. There's something about that gritty original that just cannot be topped. I couldn't imagine a movie like Seven being remade, could you? I feel just as strongly about movies like Omen and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It's like Hoobastank covering "Alive". NO.
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:36 pm Posts: 1528 Location: Chicago, IL Gender: Male
yeah, it's really bothersome that 87% of all movies that come out of big hollywood are either remakes, sequels, or based on books or movies or 9/11. does no one really have an original idea in their head anymore?
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:02 pm Posts: 10690 Location: Lost in Twilight's Blue
It's a fact, people with Josh Homme avatars do not approve of this remake.
_________________ Scared to say what is your passion, So slag it all, Bitter's in fashion, Fear of failure's all you've started, The jury is in, verdict: Retarded
Remakes are for stupid pussies that have no talent, drive or creativity. There are exceptions, but they're a small percentage.
Which is why you'll find that it is the studio execs that greenlight the vast majority of remakes, bringing in the "talent" after the fact.
Please elaborate. Are you being sarcastic or are you suggesting that a remake can work if you have the right director, producer, cast, etc.?
I do believe a remake can work if the drive behind it is a talented & creative filmmaker who can put his or her own stamp on it, or offer something slightly different but equally entertaining as the original in it's day. Good examples are Scorsese's Cape Fear, Cronenberg's The Fly, Soderberg's Ocean's Eleven, and John Sturges' The Magnificent Seven, which is a remake of The Seven Samurai.
Sometimes we get noble efforts like Psycho, King Kong, Vanilla Sky, and Dawn of the Dead that aren't lacking in the talent department but aren't really necessary remakes to begin with.
But the majority of remakes are product like Poseidon, Mr. Deeds, The Haunting, the Jackal, Red Dragon, etc that are the result of studio execs saying "hey, let's remake so and so, it'll make a killing" and then bringing in the director, screenwriter, acting, etc to mke their poor idea "watchable."
Remakes are for stupid pussies that have no talent, drive or creativity. There are exceptions, but they're a small percentage.
Which is why you'll find that it is the studio execs that greenlight the vast majority of remakes, bringing in the "talent" after the fact.
Please elaborate. Are you being sarcastic or are you suggesting that a remake can work if you have the right director, producer, cast, etc.?
I do believe a remake can work if the drive behind it is a talented & creative filmmaker who can put his or her own stamp on it, or offer something slightly different but equally entertaining as the original in it's day. Good examples are Scorsese's Cape Fear, Cronenberg's The Fly, Soderberg's Ocean's Eleven, and John Sturges' The Magnificent Seven, which is a remake of The Seven Samurai.
Sometimes we get noble efforts like Psycho, King Kong, Vanilla Sky, and Dawn of the Dead that aren't lacking in the talent department but aren't really necessary remakes to begin with.
But the majority of remakes are product like Poseidon, Mr. Deeds, The Haunting, the Jackal, Red Dragon, etc that are the result of studio execs saying "hey, let's remake so and so, it'll make a killing" and then bringing in the director, screenwriter, acting, etc to mke their poor idea "watchable."
We're in complete agreement here.
_________________ Outside the rain is tapping on the leaves
To me it sounds like they're applauding us
The quiet love we make
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:02 pm Posts: 10690 Location: Lost in Twilight's Blue
I have a problem with remakes in general, especially with horror movies because it's a genre I love so much. I'd much rather see a new idea get a chance than to just tread the exact same waters all over again. As mentioned, there are exceptions to this, and I can understand remaking a movie that wasn't all that great to begin with and trying to improve upon it (the Toolbox Murders, the Hills Have Eyes). However, for the most part, I have a problem with them re-doing the classics. I loathe that now, when I talk about Dawn of the Dead, I actually have to call it Dawn 78 so someone will know I'm not talking about the Ving Rhames version.
As for the Omen, I'm not a huge fan of the original so I guess they can do whatever they want with this one. I think doing something like 28 Days Later, an obvious re-imagining and homage of the Romero flicks, is much better than just doing an outright remake. The basic story and characters are revived for a new generation, without tarnishing the classic originals.
_________________ Scared to say what is your passion, So slag it all, Bitter's in fashion, Fear of failure's all you've started, The jury is in, verdict: Retarded
Post subject: Re: Movie: Omen; But on a larger scale, Remakes
Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 7:22 pm
Supersonic
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:26 pm Posts: 14525 Location: Buffalo
Outsider wrote:
Why is Hollywood taking classic horror movies and redoing them with their fancy shmancy effects? Why don't they just pull the original film out of the vaults and take a steaming hot dump all over it.
_________________ If animal trapped call 410-844-6286, then hit option 1123 6536 5321, then dial 4 8 15 16 23 42
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:02 pm Posts: 10690 Location: Lost in Twilight's Blue
Just Justin wrote:
Gimme Some Skin wrote:
The Omen remake has no real chance of being better than the original.
Although, I did kind of enjoy the remake of TCM. Obviously not nearly as good as the original, but still kind of fun.
Me too. Dawn of the Dead remake is really good. and i actually liked the Psycho remake with Vince Vaughn and William H Macy
See to me redoing Dawn and TCM is like someone re-writing the bible to me. Even I could enjoy the movie in an "it's only a sequel sense", it's still treading on holy ground to me. I am interested in the TCM prequel though.
_________________ Scared to say what is your passion, So slag it all, Bitter's in fashion, Fear of failure's all you've started, The jury is in, verdict: Retarded
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:15 pm Posts: 25452 Location: Under my wing like Sanford & Son Gender: Male
bknollenberg wrote:
yeah, it's really bothersome that 87% of all movies that come out of big hollywood are either remakes, sequels, or based on booksor movies or 9/11. does no one really have an original idea in their head anymore?
What's wrong with movies based on books? All but one of Kubrick's movies was based on a book.
_________________ Now that god no longer exists, the desire for another world still remains.
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 5:47 am Posts: 27904 Location: Philadelphia Gender: Male
Orpheus wrote:
bknollenberg wrote:
yeah, it's really bothersome that 87% of all movies that come out of big hollywood are either remakes, sequels, or based on booksor movies or 9/11. does no one really have an original idea in their head anymore?
What's wrong with movies based on books? All but one of Kubrick's movies was based on a book.
I agree. Basing a movie on a book and remaking another movie are completely different. Books and movies are two mediums, so basing a movie on a book is just translating a piece of art into another medium.
_________________ It's always the fallen ones who think they're always gonna save me.
yeah, it's really bothersome that 87% of all movies that come out of big hollywood are either remakes, sequels, or based on booksor movies or 9/11. does no one really have an original idea in their head anymore?
What's wrong with movies based on books? All but one of Kubrick's movies was based on a book.
I agree. Basing a movie on a book and remaking another movie are completely different. Books and movies are two mediums, so basing a movie on a book is just translating a piece of art into another medium.
Agreed. They are vastly different and I always find it funny when people complain that a movie wasn't exactly like the book it was adapted from. So many people forget that film is first and foremost a visual medium.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:02 pm Posts: 10690 Location: Lost in Twilight's Blue
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
Has anyone seen the trailer? It seriously looks like the EXACT same movie, only shitty.
I think the original movie is kind of shitty, so I don't see how that's any different. I've just always been indifferent to that whole series.
_________________ Scared to say what is your passion, So slag it all, Bitter's in fashion, Fear of failure's all you've started, The jury is in, verdict: Retarded
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum