THE FOG Remake (1 Viewer)

[Joe Karlosi]

Certainly not. But then why be so bothered when I'm in my "anti-remake" mode?

 

[Kevin M]

That depends on how you look at it, IMO the "changes" in most of these remakes are superficial at best and made only as an excuse to #1 remake the film, #2 ride the coat tails of other successful genera films & #3 attempt to claim it as "our own film" rather than come up with something original, I say this specifically about TCM as I pretty much disagree with your view of them "trying something new" since IMO they took what was a fairly original & disturbing film (for it's time) and turned it into a I Know What You Did Last Summer/Scream/80's slasher hybrid with a bit of Blair Witch thrown in for good measure...that's not "original" IMO, that's just the old Dino De Laurentiis formula of taking from other more successful and/or original films in an attempt to play towards a market....with the added bonus of TCM's name recognition.

I cannot say this about DOTD as I haven't seen it yet (I will).

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I Love the original. Why do they have to do this?
I remember going to the theatre after school when I was a sophmore in High School and being the only one in the audience. Talk about trippy.

 

[GeorgePaul]

Wow...thank God someone else agrees with me on this. And yet, while Halloween was the film that spawned all the sequels/remakes, all those other movies couldn't tarnish the reputation of the creepy original.

I WILL say, though, that whoever remakes The Fog might be able to improve on its characterization or realism, but they'll NEVER be able to match the mood of the original. John Carpenter himself was blown away by the shots the second unit was able to get around Inverness and Point Reyes, California--so much so that he owned a second home there for many years. I've been there myself, and believe me--there is no way, in an eternity, that even the most adept filmmaker can digitally replicate (much less exceed) that soggy, clammy, icy-damp backdrop of that peninsula north of San Francisco.

As much as I don't like the rash of remakes Hollywood is putting into wide release so far this century, people need to get over them. Remakes happen, and they're going to continue to happen. They're only a problem when the moviegoer doesn't have any other choice of film to enjoy at the theater--and rarely has this occurred, even now. The reaction against them seems to be getting stronger because, IMHO, more and more marketing dollars are going into them. Audiences just don't respond to movie/TV trailers and magazine, newspaper and web ads for a remake of a title the way they would to the same ads for an original title.

 

[Kevin M]

Well even if they do remake it it will most likely be filmed in Canada to save $...not that there aren't some beautiful coastlines in Canada but this particular area in CA is remarkable.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I agree. I live near about an hour from the coastline. Beautiful though I still cant find that lighthouse!

 

[TedT]

deleted redundant post. Point was made earlier.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Looks like they are going for the teenie bopper crowed like the House of Wax remake.

Smallville's Clark Kent, Tom Welling, and Lost hottie, Maggie Grace, are both set to star in the remake of the John Carpenter classic The Fog.

Rupert Wainwright is set as the director of the film set in a Northern California town where, about 100 years ago, a ship sank under mysterious circumstances in a thick, eerie fog. The ghosts of the deceased mariners return from their watery graves to seek their revenge. Welling will play a local boat owner who never left the town, and Grace will portray a college girl who is back in her hometown for the summer.

 

[JonZ]

"but they'll NEVER be able to match the mood of the original."

This is what I loved about old Carpenter films. The atmosphere. What the hell happened to him? He had so much potential.

Say what you want about how crappy Season Of the Witch or Christne were, but the man used to know how to create atmosphere and mood.

Its only been recently Ive seen some films that can match what he did 25 years ago.

 

[Colton]

All I have to say is they better not change the ending. The ending was perfect!

- Colton

 

[Jordan_E]

You know they will, to leave it open for the sequel!

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Well the original ending was kind've a sequel ending depending on how you look at it.

 

[Kevin M]

Personally I loved SOTW and Christine but it should be noted that Carpenter didn't direct Halloween III, he co-produced it & did the score....one of my favorite Carpenter scores BTW.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Interview with Carpenter and Director of new Fog movie. He also talks about a few of his other films.


http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=7625

 

[Michael Allred]

Ugh, another PG-13 "horror" film. Thanks a LOT. I'll pass now.

 

[Michael Elliott]

What do people have against horror films being rated PG-13? The majority of horror films are PG or under if you look at everything from 1907 through the early 70's. You don't need gore or an R rating to make a good horror movie.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

Mike,

You might think it's just because we horror fans want blood, guts & gore. But that's simply not the (whole) case.

In order for a horror movie to achieve some true grimness and intensity, it needs to cross that "family-friendly" boundary. (Not always, of course, but usually.) How intensely scary can a movie be if most of the real nasty / disturbing / dark material was excised to appease the 14-year-olds?

If The Exorcist were made today, it would still be rated R. Partially because of the physical violence and the pea soup, but mainly because of the tone, the content, and the "adult" themes. And what would The Exorcist look like if most of those elements had been removed just so "the teenagers" would go see it on opening weekend?

Cronenberg's The Fly? Carpenter's The Thing?

Yes, movies like Poltergeist and The Others succeed because they take a different approach - but most sincere horror films want to SCARE you in a way that the PG or PG-13 ratings will simply not allow.

You're right to say that there are lots of non-R rated high-quality horror movies - but, to me, the PG / PG-13 shoehorn mentality, more often that not, sucks the very heart and soul out of something that really should be SCARY!

You might be able to trim a few raunchy jokes out of a comedy and still produce a very funny film. But horror movies are different. Most of them are unfairly disemboweled by the desperate need for that oh-so-enviable PG-13.

 

[Michael Elliott]

Well, in a way I think the horror genre went downhill because people simply got lazy in the writing department and instead went for blood, violence and nudity. Not that there's anything wrong with that because I love the slashers of the 1980s. I've always felt that it's very hard to impossible for a gory film to be scary.

If people don't like the PG-13 rating because these films are aimed at kids, that's another issue and something I would agree with 100%. However, for the term "scary", I think the right director and screenwriter could come up with a very scary movie that's aimed at adults and still carries a PG or PG-13 rating.

Thinking as I write this, I think I'd agree with you. IF a film is being made to be scary, then I'd say a good director could get away with a PG/PG-13 rating. IF a film is trying to be a slasher then there's no way anything under an R could work. I thought the original THE FOG was quite scary so this could be a film that could work at a PG-13 but from the interview, it does seem they're going for the kids and money.

This PG-13 curse seems to have hit every genre even though the recent HOUSE OF WAX and THE AMITYVILLE HORROR went for the R-rating, which made me happy. My friend and I went to see TAH and it was rather shocking to see a recent horror film with sex, nudity and gore.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

And here you make another good point: just as a PG-13 is no guarantee of a worthless horror flick -- an R rating is never a sure indicator of a good horror movie. I walked into Amityville and Wax with relatively high hopes for each one, and both, while not awful movies, were definitely disppointments in my book.

 

[Kevin M]

I love JC, there are some classic "Carpenter" quotes in that interview:


My reservation to that thought is that I feel if CGI is done correctly with care, in the appropriate places, and supplemented with "real" then it is much more successful than CGI by itself and for itself.