• 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!

Movies and TV Shows that should NEVER be Remade

eklypse

Lieutenant
Red Shirt
As of late, Hollywood has had a fascination with (IMO)needlessly remaking some classic and not-so classic films.
Admittedly, there are some good stories that were poorly executed the first time around and deserve an update but this isn't the case for the majority of Hollywood updates.

What films or shows do you think should never be remade? I'm limiting this list to films/shows that haven't already been remade or are in production.

EDIT-Since this isn't limited to just Sci-Fi, would someone mind moving this Gen TV?
 
Anticipating that this will be moved to Gen TV per the OP's request, Casablanca and Citizen Kane are two that are at the top of the list, because both have been subject to remake rumors from time to time.

I'd also hate to see any remakes of Chaplin comedies.

TV-wise I can't see a new version of The Avengers working.

The thing is, people who try to remake shows like these miss the point as to why they're considered cult favorites. They were all about the actors who played the characters, not so much the characters or the storylines. You could remake Citizen Kane line by line and it would fail because you didn't cast Orson Welles. Casablanca's story is penny ante B-movie stuff that was cobbled together on the fly, loosely based on a failed stage play; the movie worked because of Bogart, Bergman and Claude Rains. Try to do a version without them, and it'll suck. David Soul (yes, of Starsky and Hutch fame) found that out when he tried to do a TV series remake in the 80s. And Timothy Dalton was almost laughed out of the room when he stepped into Clark Gable's shoes as the new Rhett Butler in the Scarlett mini-series, perhaps not realizing that Rhett Butler was just a cipher and the appeal was in Gable, full stop.

And if you want to see a textbook example of filmmakers completely missing the appeal of a cult show, try to endure the 1990s Avengers remake...

All that said, there are exceptions. Get Smart was all about Don Adams and Barbara Feldon, not Max and 99. But the remake worked because the filmmakers realized the movie was about Steve Carrell and Anne Hathaway and how they interacted and built the movie around them (even to the point of some screen test improvisation by Anne being incorporated into the script). But it's the exception.

Alex
 
As of late, Hollywood has had a fascination with (IMO)needlessly remaking some classic and not-so classic films.

People frequently say this - but it is not at all a new trend. Hollywood has almost never been about original material, canabalizing freely from itself, plays, books, comics, video games, amusement park rides - basically anything. The classic 1939 Wizard of Oz starring Judy Garland was the 4th film adaptation of the book. Remakes have been happening basically since someone first turned on a camera.

The thing is, people who try to remake shows like these miss the point as to why they're considered cult favorites. They were all about the actors who played the characters, not so much the characters or the storylines. You could remake Citizen Kane line by line and it would fail because you didn't cast Orson Welles. Casablanca's story is penny ante B-movie stuff that was cobbled together on the fly, loosely based on a failed stage play; the movie worked because of Bogart, Bergman and Claude Rains. Try to do a version without them, and it'll suck. David Soul (yes, of Starsky and Hutch fame) found that out when he tried to do a TV series remake in the 80s. And Timothy Dalton was almost laughed out of the room when he stepped into Clark Gable's shoes as the new Rhett Butler in the Scarlett mini-series, perhaps not realizing that Rhett Butler was just a cipher and the appeal was in Gable, full stop.

Interesting point and I think you are quite correct - but then most films are about hitting the right chemistry between material and cast. I was the first to say when the teasers for Pirates of the Carribbean were running around - Seriously? They're down to spinning movies off Disneyland rides now?? But the chemistry and material was a near-perfect mix, turning into a funny oddball blockbuster.

So, as you point out about Get Smart - find a new "right mix" and just about anything can be remade successfully. I think you may have a point that a few pieces are so iconic though that it would be hard to overlay the image of them that exists in our minds with any new cast. Occasionally though, they can be cannibalized too. I remember seeing the Siskel and Ebert review of the so-bad-it's-good comic book adaptation Barb Wire which ripped off Casablanca without shame. Both critics agreed it was so outrageous that it worked.

As for Gone With the Wind, I have longed for a new adaptation of the book, because the 1939 version was fairly sanitized, leaving out some of the best stuff from the book, including two of Scarlett's children!! Sadly, political correctness precludes any new version of this classic, but absolutely racist, tale ever hitting the screens again.
 
With it being the 25th anniversary of the first Back to the Future movie I really would hate to see that movie remade. I am generally alright with remakes and try to give them a fair shot but I don't think I would like to see that franchise redone because it was so dependent on the actors that played the roles.
 
I'm a big defender of remakes in general. Why shouldn't classic (or not-so-classic) stories get reinterpreted from time to time? But I agree that there's a very, very small handful of genuine movie miracles that one remakes at one's own peril. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. CASABLANCA. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK. NORTH BY NORTHWEST.

These are the movies where the stars were in alignment, the chemistry clicked, and casting and the direction and the music and everything else all came together to create a special magic that probably can't be duplicated, no matter how hard you try.

But, again, I think those are exceptions to the rule.
 
I'm a big defender of remakes in general. Why shouldn't classic (or not-so-classic) stories get reinterpreted from time to time? But I agree that there's a very, very small handful of genuine movie miracles that one remakes at one's own peril. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. CASABLANCA. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK. NORTH BY NORTHWEST.

These are the movies where the stars were in alignment, the chemistry clicked, and casting and the direction and the music and everything else all came together to create a special magic that probably can't be duplicated, no matter how hard you try.

But, again, I think those are exceptions to the rule.

I can think of a few more.

Princess Bride- just like lightning in a bottle

Gandhi -you could make another film but a re-make? Kingsley killed, IMO.

Actually, the argument that a movie that made it solely on the iconic performance(s) of the actors shouldn't be re-made holds water with me....
 
As of late, Hollywood has had a fascination with (IMO)needlessly remaking some classic and not-so classic films.


EDIT-Since this isn't limited to just Sci-Fi, would someone mind moving this Gen TV?

"My Mother the Car." ;)

I'm already upset they remade "Lion in Winter". Patrick Stewart was too old to play King Henry to Glen Close's Eleanor.
 
They already re-made My Mother the Car. They made it an action/adventure piece and called it Knight Rider. :rommie:

No remakes for:
The Day the Earth Stood Still (Too late I know but how many people will remember the remake?)
2001
 
Star Trek, Star Wars, Magnum, MacGyver, 2001, 2010, Forbidden Planet, Rambo, Cliffhanger, Total Recall, Terminator, Alien, The Thing, Blade Runner, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Blade, Back to the Future, Stargate, Star Wars, Predator, and, uh, Star Wars.
 
With it being the 25th anniversary of the first Back to the Future movie I really would hate to see that movie remade. I am generally alright with remakes and try to give them a fair shot but I don't think I would like to see that franchise redone because it was so dependent on the actors that played the roles.
Back to the Future should never be touched. I couldn't imagine anyone performing the characters as well as michael J. Fox, Chris LLoyd and tom Wilson did.
 
Back to the Future should never be touched. I couldn't imagine anyone performing the characters as well as michael J. Fox, Chris LLoyd and tom Wilson did.

Interestingly, there was a story over on Yahoo this morning about how Fox wasn't the original casting for Marty. Eric Stolz was on the film for a few weeks and it was decided that he just wasn't working out.
 
Actually, the argument that a movie that made it solely on the iconic performance(s) of the actors shouldn't be re-made holds water with me....


What about DRACULA? Lugosi's performance is timeless, but the movie itself had aged badly. And Christopher Lee proved there was always room for another take on the the Count.
 
What about DRACULA? Lugosi's performance is timeless, but the movie itself had aged badly. And Christopher Lee proved there was always room for another take on the the Count.
I suppose that Dracula, being an adaptation of the original book (and not the first; that was Nosferatu in 1922) has a get-out-of-jail-free card, as does the Charlton Heston Ben-Hur (, which was the third screen adaptation of the source novel). Great novels and plays can often be re-interpreted quite successfully.

(Edit: Blade Runner still doesn't need a remake,though.)
 
Back to the Future should never be touched. I couldn't imagine anyone performing the characters as well as michael J. Fox, Chris LLoyd and tom Wilson did.

Interestingly, there was a story over on Yahoo this morning about how Fox wasn't the original casting for Marty. Eric Stolz was on the film for a few weeks and it was decided that he just wasn't working out.

Yeah, it was titled "Original Marty McFly Revealed" or some such thing. Even though this has been known for years. :rolleyes:

I guess they're not called "yahoo" for nothing.
 
What about DRACULA? Lugosi's performance is timeless, but the movie itself had aged badly. And Christopher Lee proved there was always room for another take on the the Count.
I suppose that Dracula, being an adaptation of the original book (and not the first; that was Nosferatu in 1922) has a get-out-of-jail-free card, as does the Charlton Heston Ben-Hur (, which was the third screen adaptation of the source novel). Great novels and plays can often be re-interpreted quite successfully.

(Edit: Blade Runner still doesn't need a remake,though.)


I don't know. I've always found the distinction between adaptations and non-adaptations to be kind of arbitrary. Most movies are based on something after all. I'm not sure why it would be okay to remake, say, LOGAN'S RUN, because that was based on a book, but not okay to remake FANTASTIC VOYAGE, which wasn't.
 
With it being the 25th anniversary of the first Back to the Future movie I really would hate to see that movie remade. I am generally alright with remakes and try to give them a fair shot but I don't think I would like to see that franchise redone because it was so dependent on the actors that played the roles.
Back to the Future should never be touched. I couldn't imagine anyone performing the characters as well as michael J. Fox, Chris LLoyd and tom Wilson did.


Yeah, exactly. That means, stay away from the franchise, Bieber! Keep your stupid hair away from it!
 
I don't think anything should be "hands-off" when it comes to remakes and a really good example would be the Star Wars Special Editions. I've felt for a while now I would have rather seen Lucas completely remake 4-6 to match up to 1-3, thus leaving the OT completely alone, than to see the occasionally improved, often worsened SE's that we ended up with.

Though in general I would advise studios to look for movies that had great concepts, but stumbled in the execution. Do you really think you're going to replicate Casablanca? Why not take something that didn't go over well the first time, and try to make it the new Casablanca?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top