Do all of these remakes help in getting OAR video releases of the original films? (1 Viewer)

[Harry-N]

Gee, I came back to this thread I started to see if there was any news. Between the remake arguments, I would guess that the answer to my original question is "No."

For the record, I like the original story enough and the main actors in the remake enough to go see the updated version. I do however ultimately hope for a nice, upgraded anamorphic DVD of the original.

Harry

 

[Michael Elliott]

Here's the bottom line Joe. You've owed me $20 on a bet that you still haven't paid on in three years now. That shows your character but we can end that as well as this little remake issue that keeps running through your head. I'll throw in that $20 as well as buy you this upcoming DVD (if it's 16x9) as well as buy you an additional ten Blu-rays if you can prove that there are more remakes today than in previous decades. In fact, I'll let you name remakes from the 70's until 2009. I'll just get all the remakes from the 30's through 50's.

The bottom line is that there are far more remakes in the past than today. The only difference is that you know the remakes today because you've seen the originals whereas those older remakes, you don't know them because you don't know the originals. There's no debating it because it's a fact but I'm sure I could lay the proof right in front of your eyes and you'd still want to debate it.

You can keep going on these long posts or you can put up and prove your points. When you lose you won't have to return a thing to me because proving something to you once again will be satisfaction enough for me. If you don't want to try and prove me wrong then it's clear you want to add nothing except arguments to any thread you enter and from that point on you will simply be put on my ignore list. I hope you take the little bet and prove my theories wrong that you do just like to argue to give yourself something to do.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

You'd then also have to bet all the newspaper and magazine article writers in the world, plus every person on the streets, as well as the modern-day screenwriters who've said themselves that the remake epidemic these days is so out of control that they're now commissioned to seek out old movies on the internet to see what remakes they can try as their latest assignments today. It would not be possible to list each and every remake ever made throughout history, but I'm specifically referring to modernized remakes of movies that did not require to be remade. Not just silents being redone for sound, or movies remade when the originals were out of circulation, long before TV and Home Video made them easy to see. We're talking about two different breeds.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Consider how long ago they were. And at that time, nobody was crying "oh no, not another remake!"

 

[Michael Elliott]

Joe, I understand where you're coming from but my point remains. There are far more remakes in the past than today. You keep saying silent/sound. Teens in the 1950s didn't want to see a silent movie so that was a reason to update them. Teens today don't want to see something from the 1970s so that's why they're getting updated.

This is just from a small movie book of mine. I found these in less than an hour and this book is very small and doesn't feature many movies. These were just in "A" and "B". This is just a very select few and you'll notice how close they were made to one another. You have Oscar winners being remade in a short period. The bottom line is that Hollywood has always been unoriginal or willing to milk something to death in order to make a dime. Whereas in 1939 people would flock to "A" pictures, that's not the case anymore.

ABIE'S IRISH ROSE 1927 remade 1946
ACCENT ON YOUTH 1935 remade 1950 & 59
ADAM'S RIB 1949 remade 1956
ADMIRABLE CRICHTON 1918 remade 1919 & 57
ADVENTURE IN IRAQ 1943 remade 1958
ADVENTURE TOM SAWYER 1930 remade 1938, x2 in 73 (liter classic)
ADVICE TO LOVETOWN 1933 remade 1958
AFFAIR TO REMEMBER 1958 original 1938
AGAISNT ALL FLAGS 1952 remade 1967
ALGIERS 1938 original 37, remade again 1948
ALICE ADAMS 1923 remade 1935
ALOMA OF THE SOUTH SEAS 1927 remade 1941
ALWAYS GOODBYE 1938 original version 1934
AMAZING ADVENTURE 1920 remade 1936
AMERICAN TRAGEDY 1931 remade as A PLACE IN THE SUN
AND THEN THERE WERE NONE (countless)
ANIMAL KINGDON 1932 remade 1946
ANNA AND THE KING OF SIAM 1946 remade 1956
ANNA CHRISTIE 1923 remade twice in 1930
ANNA KARENTINE 1927, remade 35 & 48
ANNA LUCASTA 1949 remade 58
ANYTHING GOES 1936 remade 56
APRIL LOVE 1957 original 1944
ARIZONA TO BROADWAY 1933 remade 1944 by L&H
ASPHALT JUNGLE 1950 x3 remakes
AWFUL TRUTH 1925, 29, 37, 53
BABBITT 1923 remade 1934
BACHELOR MOTHER 1939 remade 1956
BACK FROM ETERNITY 1937 remade 1956
BACK STREET 1932 remade 41, 61
BACK TO GOD'S COUNTRY 1919, 27, 53
BAD LANDS 1930 remade 1934
BAD MAN 1923 remade 30, 37, 41
BARRETTS OF WIMPOLE ST. 1934 remade 57
BAT, THE 1915, 26, 30, 59
BEACHCOMBER 1938, 55
BEAST FROM HAUNTED CASTLE 1957 remade 60
BEAU BRUMMELL 1924 remade 54
BEAU GESTE 1926 remade 39 & 66
BEAUTY AND THE BOSS 1932 remade 34
BECKY SHARP 1923 remade 32, 35
BEHIND THE HIGH WALL 1939 remade 56
BEN-HUR 1925 remade 59 oh yeah 1907 as well

BERKELEY SQUARE 1933 remade 51
BETWEEN TWO WORLDS 1944 original 33
BIG DEAL ON MADONNA ST. 1958 (Larceny, Inc '42)
BIG OPERATOR 1942 remade 59
BIG STAMPEDE 1927 remade 32 & 37
BIG TREES 1937 remade 1952
BILL OF DIVORCEMENT 1932 remade 40
BIRD OF PARADISE 1932 remade 51
BITTER SWEET 1933 remade 40
BLIND ALLEY 1939 remade 45
BLONDES AT WORK 1938 original 35
BLOOD AND SAND 1922 remade 41
BLUE ANGEL 1930 remade 1959
BLUEBEARDS 8TH WIFE 1923 remade 38
BORN TO THE WEST 1926 remade 37
BROTHER DOUBLOON 1942 remade 47
BREAKING POINT 1947, 50, 58
BREWSTER'S MILLIONS (countless by 45 version)
BRITISH INTELLIGENCE 1925 remade 30, 40
BROADWAY BILL 1934 remade 50
BROADWAY MELODY 1929 remade 40
BROADWAY MUSKETEERS 1934 remade 38
BROKEN BLOSSOMS 1919 remade 1936
BROKEN LANCE 1954 original 49
BROTHER RAT 1938 remade 52
BUCCANEER 1938 remade 58
BULLETS FOR O'HARA 1939 remade 41
BUT THE FLESH IS WEAK 1932 remade 34

 

[chas speed]

Yes, but they actually made good films in the 40's, 50's and 60's, but due to the large amount of remakes these days there is almost nothing good coming out.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Mike, you and I are not going to agree on the remake thing. When you say "there have always been remakes", that's just a technicality... yes, there always have been to some degree, but under what circumstances and why the need back then (other than like today's pure greed and bankable box office as the primary motivating factor)? At least there was some rhyme or reason artistically back then, not just for the money. How many of those earliest remakes really needed some fine tuning or upgrading? Most of them did, if not all of them. Why does something like THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE need to be redone now - and especially when it still takes place in the same decade it was originally made (the '70s)?

I think it's blatantly obvious that today is a remake epidemic, and everyone else seems to be aware of it too, and it's become the talk of the movie industry. It's become a running gag that everyone asks: "So what are they going to remake next??" This never happened to this degree before. Someone mentioned THE THING and THE FLY (and I'll also add THE BLOB and 1978's INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS).... when these movies came out in the late '70s/1980s (I remember well, because I'm older than you - no offense), nobody felt like: "oh God - here we go again! MORE remakes?? What will they remake next??" It was still a relatively "offbeat" thing, not the rule.

That list you provided above only makes me more sure of it; your list is mostly of silent films that had to be revamped for sound, or movies from the 1930s which were out of circulation (no TV or DVD back then) and so got remade in the '40s or '50s. So listing silent movies which were either impossible to see, or lost, isn't the same thing as remaking something from the 1970s or 1980s today. I don't know where there is any list available of every single one of the more recent modern remakes, say from 1989 to 2009 --- but I'm sure if they could be listed, they would dwarf your above list, even in the past 20 years alone. And I'd say the "need" for these to be remade is much more unnecessary than it was in the 1920s-1950s.


I don't think movies were generally made "for teens" back then, though there were exceptions; I think the movies of 1920 - 1960 (and possibly even later) were mostly more geared to adults. This is another point - many more movies TODAY are made specifically with teens in mind, for a younger audience.

And in your quote here, I again think there's a huge difference in remaking obscure and hard-to-see old silent films for the later advanced sound era, and remaking something like PROM NIGHT or HALLOWEEN. That's just absurd.

P.S. - You never sent me PM'd me your current address... I have the $20 ready.

 

[TravisR]

There's as many good movies today as there were 50 or 60 years ago.

 

[Jay E]

If you are comparing what the major studios were putting out then as compared to now, then I would have to disagree with you.

 

[cineMANIAC]

There was a trend 5 or 6 years ago where Hollywood was re-making every Japanese horror movie into convoluted and watered-down Americanized versions. More recently, Sony rushed a remake of the Spanish horror "Rec" ahead of its release of the original. The Remake was a scene-by-scene affair ala 1998's Psycho and completely unnecessary. It's as if the studios have spies that go to foreign countries to "detect" or sniff out a possible future hit to remake. I hated Tom Cruise's remake of "Open Your Eyes". Now Wal-Mart is having a tough time getting rid of all those copies of Vanilla Sky. If people aren't willing to shell out six bucks for a movie than the studios should consider that a wake-up call: Stop making movies out of other people's movies.

 

[Michael Elliott]

People shelled out over nearly $100 million at the box office alone in this country.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

But it's not all-inclusive. I've asked you about remakes like ROLLERBALL, THE MOD SQUAD, THE HONEYMOONERS, THE LITTLE RASCALS, THE AVENGERS ... did those make big bucks? Not all do, just because they're remakes.

You're making it sound like people go to the movies saying "wow, I love remakes so I can't wait to see this!" -- they don't go to see the movies solely BECAUSE they're remakes. Especially younger people who make up most of the box office; they don't even KNOW the movies are remakes 90% of the time; they just want to go see what's "new". That could just as well be original movies.

 

[Harry-N]

Could you two please take your remake argument elsewhere? It's not going anywhere and it clutters up this thread, which should be specifically about THE TAKING OF PELHAM 123.

Harry

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Good point, Harry. But at the same time, there's nothing much else to say about this specific topic except "Yes, it would be nice to get an anorphic upgrade for the 1974 PELHAM". The thread isn't about the movie itself, per se, as it is about wanting it in anamorphic, right?

This thread hasn't seen this much traffic in 4 years. And that's all due to the remake, which is what started this "clutter".

 

[Michael Elliott]

I count more than two.

 

[Harry-N]

Listen - I'm not trying to be contentious. As a moderator on another Forum, I understand proper 'netiquette', and one of the things we strive for is to keep threads on track.

I'm fully aware that the new version of the film isn't out yet, that there's little or no news about any updated '74 PELHAM DVD, but that still doesn't excuse the thread drift into a rant on remakes - no matter who the participants.

I started this thread, and have had an issue with not receiving emails about it, so I wasn't even aware of the several-pages-of-remakes controversy. I only found the thread again after doing a search for it when I saw the trailer in the theatre, and wondered if there was any news. I was surprised to see that there was thread activity for which I was not receiving emails, and have contacted Packer Clark in the Forum Software Problems II thread. The problem still hasn't totally been solved, though I DID receive an email with the latest post.

I've asked nicely, and even used the word 'please', for the participants in the 'remakes' argument to go elsewhere, which would include the logical coourse of action of starting another thread about it, or perhaps using PMs to settle things like personal debts that are best left off of public forums. Yes, I used the word 'two', because I honestly hadn't read through the pages of arguments from when Mr. Crawford was participating - until late yesterday. From my perspective, it appeared to be solely and lately Mr. Karlosi and Mr. Elliott who were engaging in the arguments and rants. I might even want to participate in such a thread - just not HERE.

Again, I'm not trying to pick on anyone, nor be contentious. I'd simply prefer that the thread stay on topic, and have asked for such to happen. If that makes ME some kind of bad guy, then I guess there's nothing I can do about it except take my lumps and move on.

Am I being unreasonable?

Harry

 

[Robert Crawford]

Actually, you're not so for those that want to continue to this discussion about the effects of remakes on video releases of the original films or just remakes in general, here's your thread.






Crawdaddy