THE FOG Remake (1 Viewer)

[Seth Paxton]

One need look no further than The Others for proof of this, especially the fog and sky and general visual tone laid onto what was filmed.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

If I had to sit here and respond to everything in this thread, i'd be here all night. I will say this, though, I don't mind remakes, they sometimes work and sometimes not.

I for one freaking loved the Dawn of the Dead remake, I liked it better than the original (I don't give a shit about social commentary to be quite honest with you guys), however I still love the original very much.

I liked the remake of Night of the Living Dead better than the original as well. Sorry, but I saw the original many times growing up and loved it, however I am able to own up and admit that to me the remake was just better in every category...production design, acting, lighting, music, make-up effects, writing and directing (sorry Mr. Romero, I love ya, but Savini out-did you IMO).

As a fan of The Fog I am very open to the idea and believe that it could work. Also, the notion that a film needs to be rated R to be truly scary is just utter nonsense! I don't need to see entrails hanging out of some poor slob to go along with my scares...just give me the scares without the blood, I don't need it and neither does the film, they are only for the gore hounds...something I used to be but no more. Maybe i'm going soft as I get older, who knows. :b

I saw Wrong Turn again recently and the blood in that film actually detracted from my enjoyment a little, the girl getting half-decapped in the tree just plain fucked me up for a couple of days after the first time I saw it.

Bottom line for me, i'm moving slowly but surly away from craving blood and gore to craving suspense and mood in my horror films.

One last thing, someone said earlier that the people that don't consider Halloween to be scary are also people that like 'running zombies', I took offense to this statement. It somehow implies that those who don't care for Halloween and like running zombies are somehow complete fools who are clearly and absolutly wrong. I love Halloween with a passion, and I also like running zombies over the slow variety.

Be careful how you say something here.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I agree but horror movies of late tend to be done, as said in the interview, to get teenage girls in the theatre and water them down to get a PG-13 rating.

What is ever more said about remaking The Fog is that they are going to redon The Thing. What's next,a Prince of Darkness remake??????

 

[Michael Elliott]

Very true. In the 1980's (and problem since the 30's) horror films were aimed at teenage boys but it seems the studios, thanks to films like SCREAM, realize that they'll earn even more money if the teenage girls will come with the boys so there's no real shock that these types of films are being made. It was strange but before SCREAM my friends and I couldn't get our girlfriends to go see a horror movie no matter what. However, with SCREAM we took them as did we with I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER, URBAN LEGEND and all the others.

An interesting thing is that several of these PG-13 movies are a lot more graphic than the R-rated Direct to DVD titles that are coming out each and every month. Lions Gate seems to be releasing at least 2 or 3 of these each month, all rated R but the strange thing is that if you take out the profanity you'd probably get a PG rating. There are certainly some exceptions but for the most part these PG-13 theatrical films are more brutal than the R-rated DVD titles.

Those over 20 probably remember the golden age of VHS when all sorts of junk was coming directly to VHS. THE NAILGUN MASSACRE anyone? These films, while poorly made on all levels, at least catered to the teenage boy by adding violence, gore and nudity. The nudity was as big as the murder scenes so to me it seems these recent films are missing the nudity a lot more than the violence. These R-rated DVD titles never, ever, ever feature any nudity. Is this because they aren't wanting to offend the girls watching?

I don't know but it seems more and more directors/writers/producers are making horror films without being fans of the genre. Hollywood doesn't look down on horror films any more and everyone knows they are making tons of cash. By doing this, I think they're taking away everything good about those "bad" films of the 1980s. Again, I'm not sure if this is due to the girls watching or because the directors simply don't know their films suck and need more T&A and gore to make them somewhat entertaining.

I get 2 or 3 of these direct to DVD titles a month with the most recent being a film called ZOMBIEZ. Now, I'd take an G rated remake of SILENT NIGHT DEADLY NIGHT over that R-rated trash.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

See, to me it doesn't matter what the reason is behind the PG-13 ratings for horror films, as long as the film is still creepy and effective which for me has been proven to be so.

A horror film being rated PG-13 puts restraints on the filmmaker, which in turn forces them to concentrate on finding the mood and scares elsewhere by way of a good story, acting and atmosphere, nudity, as with the gore, isn't needed. Although, of course it would have been nice to have at least one topless scene of Eliza Dushku or Emmanuelle Chriqui in Wrong Turn.

Also, before anyone catches this and accuses me of being a hipocrite, I have to confess and tell you that I started a thread in the software area asking for an unrated version of House of 1000 Corpses which is very gory, however the gore in that film is so over the top that it eventually ventures into the area of self parody and thus it didn't really bother me that much. So let me clearify, I don't mind some gore, as long as both the gore and the context it's in isn't too realistic.

 

[Mike Brogan]

Though I'm a little tired of all of the remakes, this one doesn't seem like it's treading on sacred ground. And coming from Carpenter whose remade a couple of films himself (hit and miss) with "The Thing" and "Village of the Damned" (not to mention "Escape From LA")this seems alright to me. As for the critiques that they're turning this into a teeny-bopper film, I don't see it. You've got Selma Blair in the Adrienne Barbeau role, (which is kind of funny in anatomical terms, could they be more opposite?) but they're pretty near the same age at the time of filming their respective versions. Maggie Grace is the same age as Jamie Lee in the original. I guess the big disparity is Tom Welling, but I'm willing to give him a chance, and hey at least his name is Tom. And bottom line, if it does turn out as crap (TCM remake for example) you've still got the original which will probably get a sweet re-release on DVD to coincide with the new version's marketing.

 

[Kevin M]

Does it really need a new SE, I personally think the current DVD is pretty respectable as is, the transfer is quite good, the 5.1 & original mono tracks are quality tracks considering the material they were working with, a good Debby Hill & John commentary, new & original making of featurette's, deleted scenes, gag reel etc. etc.....what more could they offer aside from HD?

 

[Michael Elliott]

I'd say MGM (or Columbia now) will just re-release the old DVD with a new cover.

 

[Michael Allred]

Just as further proof that those involved with the remake have zero respect for the original, here's what pretty boy Tom Welling had to say in the new issue of 'Entertainment Weekly';


So since I love the original, I guess that makes me unsophisticated....

all this from the joker who barely had a supporting role in the awful "Cheaper By The Dozen." I guess that was for sophisticated audiences as well, eh Tom?

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Yikes! Tom, dude, what were you thinking!?

I like Welling, but that statement is so off it's almost indescribable, and yes, a little insulting as well to fans of the original.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

You hear this kind of thing a lot from people who are working on horror remakes, but here's the main problem I have with it:

Is the new House of Wax more "sophisticated" than the original? Is The Amityville Horror? Hell, not even the remakes that I (and most people seem to) enjoy (Dawn of the Dead, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, etc.) are in no way more "sophisticated" than their forefathers are.

I think "sophisticated" is just the production buzz-word that the filmmakers are used to employing.

I think they should retire "sophisticated" and start using "slick" -- because that's what they really mean, anyway.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Your right, Scott, remakes as of late aren't more sophisticated, they are the same story just with a fresh coat of wax applied to them.

 

[Greg_S_H]

I think what he basically means is, modern audiences aren't as willing to overlook a monster that is obviously a guy in a rubber suit, just to use one example. I'm not sure if that makes them more sophisticated or less so, though. I mean, I'd rather be able to get lost in an old movie and not worry about how obvious the effects may be. I can see the strings when Buck Rogers flies off in his ship, but it doesn't faze me.

Like John, I like Welling because of his work on Smallville, but I see he is taking on the Tom Atkins role. Sorry, but Atkins cannot be replaced in anything. The man is just cool. Which reminds me, where is my Night of the Creeps on DVD?

I'm stubborn anyway and wouldn't watch a Fog remake.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I have a couple of questions, first, who's going to play the Jamie Lee Curtis role and second, are they going to stick with the original's charactor name's?

Like 'Nick Castle', it was an homage to John's friend from Halloween, and it was clever and appropriate for that film because of the team involved, but now it would seem out of place I think.

And yes, Greg, I too am waiting on Night of the Creeps on dvd. If Anchor Bay could get there hands on that it would be cool, they always hook us up.

 

[Malcolm R]

The issue is not that today's audiences are more sophisticated.

The issue is that today's audiences have a lot less imagination.

 

[Greg_S_H]

According to the IMDb, which is not entirely reliable of course, the character names are the same. Hence, Welling plays Nick Castle. Someone called Maggie Grace has the JLC role, and Selma Blair takes Adrienne Barbeau's place. As someone has noted, there are certain aspects of that latter casting that are polar opposite from one another. I shan't elaborate.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Yeah, that's definitley one of the fall-outs of the CGI revolution I think, too much is shown because it looks cool.

On the other hand CGI hasn't completely ruined things quite yet, modern audiences CAN still be frightened by a horror film if the team involved in making the film put's any effort and skill into it at all, hell, they can even use CGI if they want, but for pete's sake use it sparingly.

Having said that, I hope to God that Blake and his crew aren't CGI! :frowning:

 

[Kevin M]

Maggie Grace is apparently one of the stars of the tv show Lost, here is what she looks like:


: pretty easy on the eyes but....well, I had the biggest crush on Jamie Lee when I was growing up so it's pretty hard to best that kind of "burned in" memory.


Hell, I will! Both of those girls come from the "featherweight/diaphanous" school of actresses while the original stars are from the...um..."full of life/voluminous" category.......aw hell, the new gals are comparatively flat-chested compared to JLC and AB...OK?

 

[Greg_S_H]

 

[Scott McGillivray]

Count me in the group of doubters that this could EVER come close to the original. How can one top the start of the film with that excellent, creepy midnight ghost story being told by the legendary John Houseman? It was perfect. The kid in the movie was classic 70's style annoying kid, he could be improved upon, but Adrienne Barbeau? Nah...she was perfect for the role. The musical score? Perfect. The ending? Perfect. I could go on and on about how great this film is. How in the world could a re-make do it justice? I just would hate to see this with a bunch of computer graphics and shock-style editing.

Man...I sound like an old fart.

Where is Mike to "whippersnapper" some of these youngsters?