• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Did the 50's Sci-fi monster movies needed to be remade?

M

Moodib

Lieutenant
Red Shirt
I do! it makes perfect sense even in the 80's, afterall the 50's versions of The Thing, The Fly, Invaders from Mars, Little Shop of Horrors, The Blob and Invasion of the Body Snatchers had primitive technology while the 80's had superior special effects technology that could tell the stories better.

For example, The Thing from Another World was a good movie on it's own but a poor adaptation of the novel "Who Goes There" by John Campbell, they didn't have the time or the technology back in the 50's to make the monster right. Instead they had a guy in a killer vampire alien carrot outfit as it was not the shapeshifter like in the story, 30 years later when special effects technology has improved Universal decided to remake The Thing and John Carpenter adored the original since his childhood as he wanted to go back to the original novella for the film. His remake was truly faithful to Campbell's vision and also paid a bit of homage to Howard Hawk's version.
 
Moodib said:
I do! it makes perfect sense even in the 80's, afterall the 50's versions of The Thing, The Fly, Invaders from Mars, Little Shop of Horrors, The Blob and Invasion of the Body Snatchers had primitive technology while the 80's had superior special effects technology that could tell the stories better.

For example, The Thing from Another World was a good movie on it's own but a poor adaptation of the novel "Who Goes There" by John Campbell, they didn't have the time or the technology back in the 50's to make the monster right. Instead they had a guy in a killer vampire alien carrot outfit as it was not the shapeshifter like in the story, 30 years later when special effects technology has improved Universal decided to remake The Thing and John Carpenter adored the original since his childhood as he wanted to go back to the original novella for the film. His remake was truly faithful to Campbell's vision and also paid a bit of homage to Howard Hawk's version.
Click to expand...


The 82 remake got universally bad reviews and was compared unfavorably with the Hawk's version. While I still like the 50s movie better, the movie has found a new audience, even without a single likable/sympathetic character.

The Fly was an above avg remake, I prefer the newer version. The Invaders from Mars remake sucked..on every level. The 78 version of Bodysnatchers was a respectable update, on par with the original. The Blob remake was ok....the track record here isn't too bad.
 
Earth Vs. The Flying Saucers Please, please...
This has the potential to be one of he funniest films of the decade if done well.
 
arch101 said:
Earth Vs. The Flying Saucers Please, please...
This has the potential to be one of he funniest films of the decade if done well.
Click to expand...

Well Battle:Los Angeles, Skyline, ID4, Falling Skies, Mars Attacks (a comedy) etc...the alien suits in B:LA even have bulbous heads like EvsFS.
 
The Zombies of Mora Tau.

I mean, underwater zombies guarding a sunken treasure ship? That just cries out for a big-budget remake.

Or maybe Monster on the Campus?
 
The remake of The Fly was worthwhile. Little Shop of Horrors was not a remake, but a filmed version of a musical based on the Corman film, and it was fine. The remakes of The Thing, Invaders From Mars and Invasion Of The Body Snatchers were inferior.
 
The Day The Earth Stood Still certainly didn't need to be.
Or was it supposed to be a remake of Starman? Either way, it was bad.
 
If they think they can make an interesting story that is marketable to viewers today, have them remake whatever they want.
 
I'm sorry but The Thing 1982 is the DEFINITIVE and TRUE adaptation of John Campbell's "Who Goes There"., it did Campbell justice on film.

Would you compare it to Saw or Hostel in terms of gore that goes for the jugular and plays better with the Saw/Hostel fans?
 
No one's had a go at remaking Them!, have they? That was one of the better sci-fi films of the 50's. It was originally meant to be shot in colour and 3D, but ended up as b&w and 2D.
 
A remake of Them! could be pretty cool. I'd like to see what they do with giant CGI mutant ants.

The one problem I foresee is the need to update the premise. There aren't any atomic tests going on in New Mexico any more.
 
I like the remakes of The Thing, The Blob, and The Fly far better than the originals. In the case of Invasion of the Body Snatches, I've not seen the original, but would be (pleasantly) surprised to find that it's as good as the remake, because the remake is just a really, really good movie.

By contrast, I've not seen the remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still, but would be surprised if it wasn't better than the original, which stands in the pantheon of overrated films.

I'll tell you that I wouldn't mind seeing a remake of Manos: The Hands of Fate. I've always felt that movie was a bit unfairly maligned. Bad, yes, but it did establish an atmosphere, which is more than most movies of its ilk manage. In comparison to other movies in its weight class, such as the Coleman Francis trilogy, it fares pretty well I think.

Goliath said:
The one problem I foresee is the need to update the premise. There aren't any atomic tests going on in New Mexico any more.
Click to expand...

Easy enough; genetic engineering is a slightly more plausible excuse for mutant giant ants than atomic bombs. On the minus side, it still doesn't explain how they manage to move. But you're gonna get that with giant insect movies, best to ignore it I'd imagine.
 
A biologist once informed me that large insects probably can't exist because of the problems of scaling their exoskeleton and musculature as you suggest, and also because they wouldn't be able to deliver enough oxygen to their cells via their spiracles. There were giant insects in the late Paleozoic, but oxygen levels were much higher, and even those critters weren't on the scale of the ants in Them!.

As ants are a collective species, it made more sense to go the way that Phase IV (1974) did and have them use force of numbers to overwhelm humans. It was also quite a good movie, as I recall, but I haven't see it since the mid 70's.
 
Phase IV actually is pretty darn good, and iirc has some interesting technical accomplishments to its name. Probably the best movie (other than maybe Moon Zero Two) to be featured on MST3K.

Arthropleura was pretty big, but, yeah, it's an oxygen thing.

If arthropods had proper lungs, they could be significantly larger. If they didn't have exoseletons, larger still. But they wouldn't be arthropods anymore. :p

To be honest, a swarm of bugs is scarier than than one large bug anyway. I mean, arthropleura was tough, but it wasn't bulletproof or, in most cases, appreciably stronger or faster than a human. By contrast, you can't shoot or punch to death a swarm of ants of the same volume. I guess you could relegalize DDT. You could laugh as the white powder rained down and opened up the sodium ion channels in their crappy nervous systems and they spasmed to death. Stupid ants!
 
Silent Spring that, emmet scum!

I expect arachnids and crustaceans can grow a bit larger then, as they have book lungs and gills respectively.

Moon Zero Two is good in parts, but it has a very silly bit where they appear to turn gravity off altogether in a bar on the Moon.
 
Myasishchev said:
I'll tell you that I wouldn't mind seeing a remake of Manos: The Hands of Fate. I've always felt that movie was a bit unfairly maligned. Bad, yes, but it did establish an atmosphere, which is more than most movies of its ilk manage. In comparison to other movies in its weight class, such as the Coleman Francis trilogy, it fares pretty well I think.
Click to expand...

:lol: I wonder what the rights situation is with Manos? Doing it justice is certainly something that would be within the budgetary reach of a lot of beginning and independent filmmakers.

Would there be any point in doing it in color?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top