Halloween The Remake
 

According to the New York Times, taken from www.bloody-disgusting.com , those damn Weinstein brothers are wanting to remake Halloween...eventually.

So is anyone else tiered of remakes?

Not Halloween. You can't do that. That's just fucking wrong.

I agree completly, Halloween is one of the few really good horror slasher classics. I mean its bad enough that the sequals difted away from the original story. But don't ruin Halloween even more by doing a remake!

With H9 in pre-production, and a sequel out only a few years back, I cant imagine this happening anytime soon, if ever.

Although Carpenter's a huge sell-out latly, I guess I wouldnt be all that surprised....

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

Yes, I have read this. Yes, I am tired of the remakes. This is so wrong. I agree, the sequels have been bad enough, now this. Hopefully, this is a very long way off though.

Well, The Thing's coming shortly I bet... sad really.

I will be against the Halloween remake and I WILL NOT see it !

..who gonna play Loomis ? ...maybe CGI

I'm tired of being asked if I'm tired of remakes.

This film has already been remade over half a dozen times (what are we up to now, number 9?).

Anyone on this site who claims they would not go to see it is a big fat rotten liar.

The only remake I'd go see is of the new Amityville Horror - well how about it, Hollywood bigwigs? It's been six months...

WHAT?!

That made absolutely no sense, my friend.

A) Halloween hasn't been remade 9 times. It's had 9 sequels, but it hasn't been remade once.

B) I didn't get any of that bit you said about Amityville.

8 sequels, 7 if you don't include the non-Myers instalment.

Each one is essentially the bloody same - indestructable phsyco in Bill Shatner mask offs a load of teens.

If they remade the new remake of The Amityville Horror (2005), I'd go and see it. Perhaps it could be ready for 2006?

damnit - I want to be remade (I don't think they got it quite right the first time).

somebody needs to get shot...

summons grimm reaper to kill all of hollywood reamking movies:)

Everyone is say this would be a harrible remake I totally agree the star screamer jamie lee curtis well be a new person most likely be a new person i just couldn't imagine that pluse it would have a newer look that i think would make it lose its old quality

*Bows head in pity, then begins to weep for humanity*

:( I dont really think that had anything to do wit thread but i guess I'll agree with u

I was pitying you. Your first post in this thread wa sprobably one of the worst grammatical errors I've ever seen.

If this is true then all of the Friday the 13th (3-present) and Nightmare on Elm Street films are remakes.
Oh but wait. Thats why we horror fans like these movies!!! B/C they are all the same, thats the point to a slasher, a guy in a mask goes around and kills teens, done, simple.
But the original Halloween is a standard seter, it was one of the first true slasher films. After Halloween you had Friday the 13th and every other slasher film that followed. So you don't remake a classic like Halloween.

I'm confused with your Amityville Horror remake of the remake, I personaly think that would be retarded to remake a remake. But I haven't seen the remake b/c I hated the original.

If you hated the original, you'd love the remake. Seriously, I'd check it out if I were you.

I wanted to see the reamke, the trailer for the remake made me want to watch the original. However, after the original I hesatated. But I haven't had a chance to watch movies lately b/c I've starting hitting the Haunted Houses even though most of them are really lame. But closer to Halloween I'll check it out.

I don't understand why everyone still bitches and complains about remakes. We all know they're coming, and if you don't like it then don't watch it. IMO sequels are much worse than remakes. Remakes do nothing to the orignal series, where as a bad sequel [which 95% of them are] can totally destroy the first.

How do you figure?

As of now, when House of Wax, for example, is mentioned, 85% of people think of Paris Hilton and Chad Michael Murray. That's sad, considering that the true ingenious of the movie, portrayed by Vincent Price long ago, is barely known and almost lost. Most people don't even know that the 2005 release is a remake, for Christ's sake. And that's just one example, it goes for most of them.

So how do you figure a remake doesn't ruin a movie?
I strongly disagree. Strongly.

remake something else, leave the classics that "everybody" knows about alone wether there in color or not.

If someone isn't aware that "House Of Wax 2005" is a remake in the first place, then how does that affect the original? Either way they never knew it existed. At least now someone such as yourself can say "hey, screw that shitty remake, go check out the original". Then maybe you've created a new fan. I don't get where you're coming from here.

As for the mass amount of remakes I, just like everyone else, am completely sick of them. But it's pointless everytime a new one is announced for a new thread to be made with 30 of the same ol' "omgz not another remake fuck hollywood!" replies.

you got a point

I disagree.

well i think he/she is right. if the film is truly solid and or a cult hit, it will always be that way. they could make 1000 remakes of the NOTLD but the original would still be the masterpiece. and alot of the time true horror fans are the only ones that know about the originals.

i also agree that alot of remakes suck and hollywood sucks for making so damn many, but us bitching isnt gonna make them stop when they make millions off of each one.

Exactly what I'm getting at. If you hated "TCM 2004" it shouldn't in any way suddenly make you hate the original. Please explain yourself, alkytrio.

I just think it's a damn shame that whenever the title Texas Chainsaw Massacre is mentioned, instead of thinking of the great, gruesome '74 classic, people will think of a crappy tenn-horror flick from 2004. Mostly I just think it's a shame.

actualy a remake cant ruin a movie because its a remake it donsnt affect the original, actualy if you want to get technical a remake actualy helps a fading classic because of the fact that most of the time when a remake comes out you get the original rereleased on dvd and posibly remasterd. so remakes in some cases are like an I.V. for a dieing patient.

Well, with your logic, if a remake can't ruin an original, then neither can a sequel, and half of S.A.F.'s arguement was that a sequel ruins a movie but a remake doesn't.

A remake can't reuin the original b/c like others have said it does not continue the original story but merly retells it. This is were I get mad, personly I would like to pay $8 for a story that I haven't seen yet. Yes the simple answer is don't go see the remake, but when Saturday night rolls around and you and your buddies want to check out a horror flick and all your left with is the remake then your SOL! I agree with alkytrio666 about all of the teenie bobbers thinking that TCM 2004 is the only one. My exprence has been that people thought that Land of the Dead was a sequle to the remake of Dawn of the Dead! I had a hard time explaining to some of my friends the difference, they are mainstream movie goers. Yes we can say to the ignorant viewers that there is an original cult classic but I think most die hard fans of certain movies feel that the movie is being raped when it is remade. Its hard to explain but when classic films get remade it just feels wrong.

What's "sprobably"?

And a "wa"?

:confused:

The trouble with remakes, sick_as_fuck, is that they breed contempt - they are purely money generating ventures by fat men in suits keen to exploit each new generation with a post-modern take on a classic.

This pisses us off, regardless of whether we see them or not.

The film industry makes movies that make money.
You go see these movies,so they make more crappy movies just like it.
Who's going to make an original horror script and then get it trashed because"this doesn't make money"?

A movie doesn't do well,or goes directly to dvd,and the interns hawk it all over the horror sites....because we Will check them out,because the film industry knows we watch the crappy ones just to see if there is something better out there,and they just made MORE money from us and make crappy movies just like it.

See the conundrum?

Boycott? Are you kidding? Watching crappy horror movies is better than nothing.

But IMO-I think there are alot of good horror flicks out there,if you can not find anything you like that's new-check out a database that lists everything-out of the millions...there HAS to be something good you will enjoy.:)

One accidental mis-space is a helluva' lot better than some of your previous posts, my friend...

Exactly. And we have these kids saying "I'm such a diehard Dead fan! I've seen 'Land' twice and 'Dawn' three times...I own the unrated version."

And then you say "How do you like 'Day of the Dead?"

And they go: "What?"

Agreed

Wa?

Speak for yourself - surely everyone who uses horror websites aren't sheep waiting to be herded into the nearest multiplex by the latest thrill-a-minute bogeyman sequel or hip remake?

I think there's a syndrome sweeping horrorland - the "FoMO" phenomenon!

http://www.danherman.com/pdf/The%20F...sing%20Out.pdf