[dodge50]

Remakes are just about money. Film companies would rather turn out a remake because it is less of a gamble than making an original. They use the original as a platform to sell the remake, building on its popularity and notority, gaining years of free publicity. An original idea you have to sell to the public, it has to be exciting and new and you have to make people want to see it, and that is a big gamble for some studios. I am sure that there must be hundreds of new ideas landing on producers desks every year, but we usually end up with a tired re-hash of a worn out format. The music industry is going the same way with cover version after cover version after cover version.

That said however I don't want people to think I am against remakes. I've seen some very good remakes (TCM) and some really poor originals (The Village), but I console myself with the fact that in a few years someone will probably turn out a kickarse remake of The Village, which will be everything the orginal wasn't i.e good. Unless however the The Village was a remake of an earlier film I just never saw.

SHIT!!! I just had a thought. Does that mean the term "Original" is subjective, will the kids of today watch TCM 2003 and because they never saw TCM 1974 regard it as original.

This can only mean one thing, that my rhetoric here is just a re-hash of something someone has already said before, and that I have never had a truly original thought in my entire life!!!!

This could mean.........Oh bollocks I'm going to bed ;)