Film remakes, yea or nay...

[Warped9]

Films are always being remade, with varying success. So what's your general opinion of those you've seen?

King Kong: I like Peter Jackson's version. I think he did an admirable job, and in some ways I think he did certain things better. That said I still like the original. They're different but equal.

War Of The Worlds: I think the original is fine and I didn't mind the new version's different take on it.

The Day The Earth Stood Still: The original is great. The remake didn't have one redeemable thing about it.

Planet Of The Apes: The original is awesome. The remake is meh.

Invasion Of The Body Snatchers: The original is good. The '78 remake is really good. I can't speak to the other versions since I haven't seen them.

The Wolf Man: I haven't yet seen the original, but I rather like the new one.

The Mummy: I just can't get into the original. The Brendan Fraser version is fun.

Dracula: Not overly familiar with the Bela Lugosi version. The Keannu Reeves version makes me think of the original novel in terms of appearance, but the acting is yeesh.

Frankenstein: Again I'm not overly familiar with the original, but I'm very interested to see it. I can't think of a remake of it I really care for.

I'm sure there are films I'm overlooking.

Anyone else?

 

[RAMA]

The 2000s have been good for SF remakes...I don't think that could be said for any other decade...


King Kong: I like Peter Jackson's version. Its far better than the 70s version, and obviously stylistically and technologically it is more up to date than the original, and therefore more easy to digest.

War Of The Worlds: The remake is closer to the intent and tone of the original novel, so I give it high marks...the ending of the original 1953 alone makes it inferior to the modern version, since it undermines the original story's main theme. The two other WotW remakes from 2005 are barely worth mentioning..

The Day The Earth Stood Still: The original is STILL a good film, but the remake is better in every area, from the timelessness of the story(modern man as poor caretakers of the Earth will always be relevant, nuclear brinksmanship less so)to the expansion of themes only touched on in the original...its also far more realistic.

Planet Of The Apes: The original is far superior, but not through lack of trying from the new version. Unfortunately the remake is just ok.

Invasion Of The Body Snatchers: The original is still the best, but the '78 version holds up really well and has a genuinely scary ending.

The Wolf Man: I haven't yet seen the new one.

The Mummy: The original is considered a classic, but it is rather slow...the new one moves at a good pace and the sequels keep it fun if silly.

Dracula: Not a huge fan of most Dracula or vampire movies.

Frankenstein: I like the Branagh version. I haven't watched the original since I was a teenager.

Clash of the Titans: I can't imagine the new version not being better than the misfire of the original. Somehow they made Greek mythology--full of sex, betrayal, and action--plodding and boring...

RAMA

 

[Shazam!]

The Thing is easily an improvement upon the original as is The Fly.

The Dawn Of The Dead remake was pretty good also, but wasn't amazing by any stretch of the imagination.

Scarface is generally regarded as being better than the original, but I haven't seen the 1932 one so I can't really comment fairly.

 

[Shazam!]

Oh, and I preferred Soderbergh's Ocean's 11

 

[RAMA]

The Thing is easily an improvement upon the original as is The Fly.

It amazes me that the opinion of The Thing remake is so different than when it came out...it was universally panned...now I cant find a single person who says a bad thing about it.

Scarface is generally regarded as being better than the original, but I haven't seen the 1932 one so I can't really comment fairly.

Well Scarface isn't SF or fantasy, but although its something of a cult film it was never a critical or box office success.

RAMA

 

[Warped9]

I forgot about The Fly. The original is okay, but very dated in some respects. The Jeff Goldblum remake is genuinely creepy and can make you wince with unease, and I mean that in a good way.

 

[Kegg]

Both of the first two Invasion of the Body Snatcher films are indeed great. King Kong remakes have been lackluster, the American Godzilla was tiresome; Jackson's Lord of the Rings films were spectacular, Planet of the Apes was bad, and I can't think offhand of any other sci-fi/fantasy remakes I've seen (there are probably several).

 

[Harvey]

^^
You've at least seen the aforementioned remakes of The Fly and The Thing, no?

 

[The Comedian]

Dittos on "The Fly" and "The Thing."

Remake of "The Day The Earth Stood Still" fails because it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

"War of the Worlds" was meh - Spielberg should have cowboy upped and made it as gritty as Saving Private Ryan. The frakking teenager should have been eaten, graphically, and died screaming for his mommy.

"King Kong" was pretty good, and an improvement in that it was less black and white than the original, so to speak.

 

[Silent_Bob]

When it comes to remakes it depends entirely on whether they are doing a remake because they genuinely have a new take on the film or doing a remake to cash in on an established name.

'The Thing' is an example of the former. It takes the tension of the original, then twists it further adding paranoia into the mix.

'Godzilla' however is a perfect example of the latter.

'Planet of the Apes' is an oddity. Tim Burton certainly had a new take on the story, unfortunately it was to make it aTim Burton's film. The man has a singular talent for twisting the source material to suit his particularly warped view of the world.

 

[Kegg]

^^
You've at least seen the aforementioned remakes of The Fly and The Thing, no?

Oh yeah!

Those are nice, though I have a fondness for Vincent Price's Fly.

 

[Harvey]

I have a fondness for Vincent Price, though less so that particular film. I've been meaning to see the version of I Am Legend that he's in. One of these days...

 

[Mr. B]

Ocean's 11 and maybe The Italian Job are the only films where the remake was better IMO. Generally I think it's a sad and pathetic practice. I certainly can't think of any superior remakes in the sci fi realm.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Ocean's 11 and maybe The Italian Job are the only films where the remake was better IMO.

Have you seen The Maltese Falcon? (though I don't consider that a remake, so much as another adaptation of the original book, but a lot of people consider second adaptations to be remakes)

 

[Mr. B]

I should have mentioned that myself. It seems to come up whenever remake bashing occurs. I haven't seen the "original" 1931 version yet, but for the sake of discussion let's assume the Bogart version is better. If you have to go back to 1941 for case study in good remakes, I think that says all that needs to be said about the practice.

I just added the '31 iteration of The Maltese Falcon to the top of my Netflix queue. I'll bump this thread after I watch it. I doubt it could beat the '41 Film Noir masterpiece but it will be cool to say I've seen both.

 

[Neroon]

pssst..... sff films if you please, everyone

 

[Kegg]

^
Well, Der Golem is also very good; though the film it's a remake of no longer exists.

 

[RAMA]

The 2000s have been good for SF remakes...I don't think that could be said for any other decade...


King Kong: I like Peter Jackson's version. Its far better than the 70s version, and obviously stylistically and technologically it is more up to date than the original, and therefore more easy to digest.

War Of The Worlds: The remake is closer to the intent and tone of the original novel, so I give it high marks...the ending of the original 1953 alone makes it inferior to the modern version, since it undermines the original story's main theme. The two other WotW remakes from 2005 are barely worth mentioning..

The Day The Earth Stood Still: The original is STILL a good film, but the remake is better in every area, from the timelessness of the story(modern man as poor caretakers of the Earth will always be relevant, nuclear brinksmanship less so)to the expansion of themes only touched on in the original...its also far more realistic.

Planet Of The Apes: The original is far superior, but not through lack of trying from the new version. Unfortunately the remake is just ok.

Invasion Of The Body Snatchers: The original is still the best, but the '78 version holds up really well and has a genuinely scary ending.

The Wolf Man: I haven't yet seen the new one.

The Mummy: The original is considered a classic, but it is rather slow...the new one moves at a good pace and the sequels keep it fun if silly.

Dracula: Not a huge fan of most Dracula or vampire movies.

Frankenstein: I like the Branagh version. I haven't watched the original since I was a teenager.

Clash of the Titans: I can't imagine the new version not being better than the misfire of the original. Somehow they made Greek mythology--full of sex, betrayal, and action--plodding and boring...

RAMA

So Clash wasn't as good as I hoped, but anything is better than the original. Kudos for distilling a lot of scattered, but related mythology, into a coherent story.

RAMA