Remakes
 

Aight...

So we got a remake of House of Wax (with Paris Hilton??), we got remakes of Amityville Horror, The Hills Have Eyes, The Fog... Got an adaptation of War of the Worlds, and a rumor of an Exorcist remake.


Is there any originality in Hollywood left? Comic book movies? Remakes and adaptations? Unnecessary sequels?

I've been enjoying all the comic book adaption movies (I fucking loved Spiderman in particular). But yeh it seems like a real bad time originality wise for Hollywood even tho I have enjoyed a lot of the remakes they've done that I thought would be shit (TCM and Dawn Of The Dead). The remake that's gonna totally fuck me off is Assault on Precinct 13.......what the fuck are they thinking??!! :eek:

no need to mess with the original precint 13....i wont even rent the new one....besides, i don't watch movies with john leguizamo in em'...i get real sick and break out all over....i saw a preview somewhere for a fantastic four movie.....didn't look disgusting...shit, its gotta be better than daredevil.

i too enjoyed the dawn of the dead and TCM re-make.

I haven't had to do this to any non-spamming people ("noobs" count, I consider that whole folder spam) in a while, but

Fuck You



How many "Hollywood has no originality, they're just remaking and sequelizing and adapting everything!" threads do we REALLY need? Hey, they're remaking a lot of things, and making quite a few sequels, and adapting books and comic books, big fucking revelation. Next you'll tell me that, GASP, they're out to make money!

hahaha yes. I'm tired of hearing this crap aswell.

don't care about any of those movies

TCM remake was horrible and it had no purpose. but no one seem too explain that.


But The Hills Have Eyes remake.....

(I might get bashed) but that MIGHT be good

maybe members of this forum dont have any original idead for threads.

I don't see the problem with adapting books/comic books to films and as for remakes I thought Dawn of the Dead was great and TCM was mildly entertaining as well IMO.

And remakes do make sense, take a film that made alot of money and was popular, change some things around to bring it up to speed with the times and release it and odds are it'll do well. So maybe Hollywood as run out of ideas or maybe they're just doing what everybody else for the most part wants to do and that's make money.

Re: Remakes
 

If you don't care for remakes...don't watch them. Keep in mind however, that there would be very few movies out there for you to see. They have been doing remakes from the beginning! Really consider this. If it wasn't for remakes, there wouldn't be Boris Karloffs' Frankenstein because T. Edison made it first. No Christopher Lee's Dracula because Bela Lugosi made it first. No John Carpenters The Thing, because it was a remake of one in the 50's. Think about it...very rarely does a completely original-never before heard of or seen movie get made. Spiderman was nothing more then a remake of a cheesy Made for TV movie/series from the 70's.

I say let them make all the remakes they want. I, for one, am glad that Hammer films remade Dracula. That Universal remade Frankenstein and that Carpenter remade The Thing. Sure, it's nice to see brand-new ideas come to the screen, but If that is all we watched, we wouldn't have the thousands of good films that we have now...would we?

They're not always good remakes, but I for one, enjoy watching them take an older movie, add new technology and more money and see what they can do with it. Compair The original Thing to the remake. While I really liked the original because it was good and is a classic, James Arness basically played a living carrot from space. John Carpenter took that old film and turned it into a one hell of a Sci-Fi/Horror film, with never before used special effects that nearly all horror buffs like.

I'll keep watching the remakes....thank you very much.

This is coming from a guy, who makes two threads for the same thing.

So it has been established that IDrinkYourBlood is a guy? Cause Im still confused about that, lol

I'm not sure either

Right back at ya, buddy.
I can say whatever I want, if you think its been said before then just keep your mouth shut and let the folks who wanna reply do it.

Sorry you feel that way, but fuck you too.

Yes, you're right, you can say whatever you want, even if it makes you look like a whiny moron. And I can say whatever I want in response. It works both ways.


And "keep your mouth shut and let the folks who wanna reply do it" is a huge contradiction, by the way

:D horror.com is filled with the rudest people i have ever witnessed, ahh but who cares about all that garbage. i love me an ocasional remake movie, if infact the whole movie was shown and not leading to believe the sequal will be coming soon to a theater near us. i want a start, a middle, and an end. So , i dont recall any movie that's meeting these requirements. i dont think i like remakes.

Leave

I have been in horror movie chat rooms and I will see about 4 or 6 people bashing remakes saying they all stink etc etc. Anyway I asked a couple of those chat room regs if they liked the 1931 Frankenstien movie with Karloff and I asked another chat room guy if he liked Dracula 1931 with Bela Lugosi and they said Hell yeah those movies rule!! Then I said those movies are Remakes. They must have been kids who didnt know when the 1st or original Frankenstien and Dracula movies were made. There are alot of very good remakes that some fans to this day think they are the originals. Now not all remakes are good and not all originals are good either. What matters is if the movie your watching is good it doesnt matter if its a remake or an adaptation or an original just as long as the movie is good.

I dare you to post something that doesn't contain a film made before 1960.

LOL thats it Austin only movies made after 1960 thats going to be sooo easy. Thats not much of a dare but I will post movies made from 1961 to present. And I dare you to post something about the very 1st Werewolf movie ever made. Now I can post Hammer Dracula movies and lots of other stuff Yahoo!!!

Hey, buddy! Careful how you use that word. Its a registered trademark and they will own you if they find out you are shouting it witout written permission (implied is not enough)

LOL hey Vod I doubt if Yahoo will go after me besides the term Yahoo comes from Texas where I live. Hmm Maybe as a Texan I should sue Yahoo LOL.

ok here it is......................It was ok but it wasn't better than American Werewolf in London or Dog Soldiers, well Dog Soldiers is just my opinion but I honestly think American Werewolf in London was a better movie.

Austin I kind of figured you wouldnt know what the very 1st Werewolf movie was LOL. And you say your a horror fan shame on you. I would tell ya but It was made before 1960 LOL. Btw My fave Werewolf movie is the Howling 1981.

So you're saying films should be remade and remade until they get it right, or even better?

When this money could instead be put into new, innovative ideas struggling to get off the ground?

Sounds to me like you favour safe familiarity over risky originality.

Perhaps ItsAlive75 subscribes to my idea of thwarting these endless remakes/re-imaginings by not paying to watch or rent them in the first place - tempting as it may be to see the carnage for yourself.

The influx of dumbed down, "target audience" re-makes/re-imaginings/re-ejaculations will only be stopped if you stop funding it and making fat oily men very rich.

The Werewolf
1913
Henry MacRae

I didnt say all horror movies should be remade I just said I dont think there is anything wrong in remaking a movie 10 or 20 years later. I like original horror movie ideas what I dont like as many horror fans dont are cruddy movies. If you want to know why film makers keep remaking old classics like Dracula Frankenstien Mummy Wolfman etc. Its real easy to figure out those horror characters are monsters people like so it can only be a good idea to remake a movie about one of those characters because the studio know the movie will probley make a profit. and who knows maybe 10 years later another remake might be in the works or better yet maybe a series of movies about a character. Here is what I predict will be the next best remake this year in december fans will get inline to watch a KingKong remake. They will go see kingkong not because he is popular with fans. Hell most have forgotten who KingKong was. The reason people will line up to go see this remake is because the Director Peter Jackson the best movie director in the world today is directing the movie. Another reason is that Adrian Brody best actor a few years ago will be in it. So good director good actors good script= good movie. And thats why people will go see Kingkong next december.

Gah, you talk like you're living in the Matrix -

This plus that equals this equals entertainment?

Again, remakes that trigger familiarity in audiences may make money (unless they all listen to me, which some of them might not) but independent, original films with heart at their centre despite their rough exteriors are being eclipsed by the glossy remake juggernaut.

Unless you want to keep watching the latest fucking Wolfman and Dracula in 30 years time then this is wrong.

A lot of new horror movies - non-commercial, amature efforts - are wasted opportunities and indeed often crud, but they are the way forward in this genre and discovering something special like Buttgereit's Nekromantik, Muro's Street Trash and of course the seminal BWP is far preferable to occasionally witnessing a remake which "hey, actually, wasn't all that bad!".

you mentioned the best of the oddities ... you have to go through heaping mountains of crud to get to one or two of something watchable.

I'd rather watch a remake of Dawn obviously made by a fan with decent actors than some back yard piece of shit made by a bunch of friends with a video camera and no clue of what they are doing.

there have been some good remakes ..there have been some bad ones ..

there have been good origional films and there have been bad ones ...

just give me something made with some degree of skill in all of the important departments - and hopefully if it is remade the new version will have a little personal spin of its own.

i feel the same way about music covers .. doing the same song verbatim is pointless, but make it your own while retaining the flavour of the origional and i usually like it ...

Peter Jackson is the best director in the world- are you out of your mind?

and as far as Adrian Brody winning that oscar, there's no way you're going to convince me that Adrian Brody is a better actor than Nicholos Cage-Jack Nicholson or Michael Caine (I haven't seen Gangs of New York yet so I can't commment on Daniel Day Lewis' preformance.)

Austin I said Peter Jackson is the best director in the world and I agree if Nick Cage was in the new KingKong movie he would be another reason movie goers would go because both Adrian Brody and Nick Cage have been voted best actor. I doubt if Peter Jackson was not directing Kingkong the movie would not make as much money and the reason Brody wanted to be in the movie is because he wants to work with Peter Jackson. Peter Jackson wants to make KingKong because he is a bigtime Kong fan and its a dream come true for him. At least I am happy that KingKong will be 15 meters tall and not 25 ft tall. It would be awesome if KingKong were to open at Radio City Music Hall this december and the Roxy just like the original KingKong movie did back in 1933.

I know you said peter jackson is the best director in the world I was wondering why.

Martin Scorsese(probably spelled wrong)
Clint Eastwood(I'll admit I'm bias)
Tim Burton

all better IMO, there's probably more that I just can't think of at the moment. I don't think he's that great of a director don't get me wrong I know he's good but I just think he got a dream job with Lord of the Rings.

PJ isnt THE best, but he is great.

You forgot Ridley Scott and Jim Cameron. The list of great directors is endless. Unfortunately, the list of shitty ones is even longer.

i think i'd take coppola over Cameron.

He dosent have the range and he kind of painted himself into a corner.

coppola is my all around favorite i think ...

Cameron is a bit of a niche director, but he has done wonderful things with/for science fiction.

I wish he would come out with a nother movie, though (godammit)

If i hate Titanic for any reason, its because he stopped making movies after it....

i didnt like it because he proved himself to be too top heavy and formulatic.

The terminators were brilliant - but as with M. Night Shamaylan, i think he blew his load.

where do you think Shamalan fell off? Sixth Sense?

no i thought unbreakable was brilliant too .. very origional ..


i think signs had one effective moment and the rest was bad , including the casting.

the village was ont of the poorest films i ever saw in any respect

I forgot about Unbreakable I thought that was great too.

as for signs the only thing that freaked me out was when they first showed the alien, I thinks that's the hardest I've ever jumped at a movie. even though I knew what was about to happen just couldn't help it.