Anyone up for the Fright Night remake? (1 Viewer)

[Brisby]

Howie Scream at 0:50.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I hate this, why?


Is it because it looks like every other typical flashy and glossy horror film released now days with that God awful blue-ish hue?


Is it because I hate the casting choices?


Is it because it looks loud, fast and bombastic and lacks the quiet charm of the original?


Is it because I'm just plain sick and tired of vampires?


Yes to all of the above.

 

[Kevin M]

Hey hey hey now Hammer.....you should just be happy that we still have the original and not have an opinion at all on these remakes unless it is excepting, and CERTAINLY don't criticize the studios for the constant flow, they're just going where the money is.

Sorry, I just see that (or something similar) quite a lot when criticizing these countless remakes...find it to be an odd argument.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by Kevin M

don't criticize the studios for the constant flow, they're just going where the money is.

But in turn, the audiences are just going where the flow of movies is. If they're offered primarily needless remakes, that's what's on the menu for them to spend their money on. The studios ought to stop remaking everything and be more original and creative. After that, THAT'S where the money will be spent by viewers. It all starts with whatever the studios choose to put out there.

 

[TravisR]

But in turn, the audiences are just going where the flow of movies is.

Look at the 10 top highest grossing movies for any year in the last decade, at least half of that list is sequels, remakes or adaptations (the top 10 grossers of 2007 is all sequels and adaptations) and generally the other spots are taken up by cartoons. I'd love to see original movies but I don't blame Hollywood for giving the people what they want the most and that's familiarity and children's movies.

 

[cineMANIAC]

It doesn't look like the original is getting a re-release any time soon. I know some work was done for an eventual Blu release that would tie-in to the remake but there's been nary a peep from the studio. Maybe they're waiting until after the movie comes out.

 

[Michael Elliott]

There are more original, indie movies released each week than mindless, sequel/remake Hollywood blockbusters.


Check out www.boxofficemojo.com to see which ones people are going to see.

 

[Kevin M]

Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi




But in turn, the audiences are just going where the flow of movies is. If they're offered primarily needless remakes, that's what's on the menu for them to spend their money on. The studios ought to stop remaking everything and be more original and creative. After that, THAT'S where the money will be spent by viewers. It all starts with whatever the studios choose to put out there.

I didn't make my sarcastic point very well and that's my fault....I meant that when some of us complain in various forums about how we hate the large amount of remakes the "they are just going where the money" excuse is used quite a lot and I find that to be an odd defense of the studios. Sorry that my post wasn't clear...again, my fault.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by TravisR

Look at the 10 top highest grossing movies for any year in the last decade, at least half of that list is sequels, remakes or adaptations (the top 10 grossers of 2007 is all sequels and adaptations) and generally the other spots are taken up by cartoons. I'd love to see original movies but I don't blame Hollywood for giving the people what they want the most and that's familiarity and children's movies.

Do you really think people specifically "want" remakes? (I am not talking about "sequels" or "adaptations", so much as remakes of past movies)...? Do you think people literally walk around saying "Oh, wow, I cannot WAIT to see the latest remake!"...? If remakes are always so sure-fire, then how come so many of them also FAIL?

What would happen if Hollywood one day wiped the slate completely clean of remakes, just as an experiement? Let's say they decided "No More Remakes, Only Original Films".... don't you think that ultimately people would continue to go to the movies, anyway? Don't you think that the "Top Grossing Movies" would ultimately have to consist of Non-Remakes in such a scenario?


To say that the filmmakers are "Giving People What They Want" with remakes is just not accurate at all, IMO. In fact, more and more you can hear that all people are voicing that they're fed up with remakes and that Hollywood can't seem to come up with anything new. My girlfriend is saying it -- I hear people at work saying it -- whenever I am overhearing a movie conversation, average people are saying it too. Everyone seems to be feeling it.


Finally -- wouldn't you say that most of the time people do not even KNOW that the movie they are seeing is a remake? And if that is the case, then how can you say people are going to see it because it's "familiar" and "that's what the people want"? Young people are still the #1 source of movie revenue, and most young people have never seen the originals and don't even KNOW these movies today are largely remakes! How many people do you really think are going to see this new FRIGHT NIGHT and will even KNOW it's a remake? And how many people do you think are greatly excited to see it because th eoriginal film was such a popular movie?

 

[TravisR]

To say that the filmmakers are "Giving People What They Want" with remakes is just not accurate at all, IMO. In fact, more and more you can hear that all people are voicing that they're fed up with remakes and that Hollywood can't seem to come up with anything new. My girlfriend is saying it -- I hear people at work saying it -- whenever I am overhearing a movie conversation, average people are saying it too. Everyone seems to be feeling it.

Good. I'm more or less in agreement with them. Once people stop just saying it and actually stop going, Hollywood will stop making remakes. Personally, I think if they're remaking an OK-at-best movie like Fright Night, it shows that they're near the bottom of the barrel of what they have left to remake anyway. If people would be more 'adventurous' in their movie viewing, Hollywood would give them more adventurous movies. As it stands, familiarity is making Hollywood the most money and so they go after it.

I meant that when some of us complain in various forums about how we hate the large amount of remakes the "they are just going where the money" excuse is used quite a lot and I find that to be an odd defense of the studios.

'Defense'? I know you're only using that word as an attempt to make my points look bad but I'm not defending the studios at all. I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me but it's ridiculous to say I'm defending the studios (which I think are basically soulless machines that only care about making money any way they can).

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by TravisR

Good. I'm more or less in agreement with them. Once people stop just saying it and actually stop going, Hollywood will stop making remakes. Personally, I think if they're remaking an OK-at-best movie like Fright Night, it shows that they're near the bottom of the barrel of what they have left to remake anyway. If people would be more 'adventurous' in their movie viewing, Hollywood would give them more adventurous movies. As it stands, familiarity is making Hollywood the most money and so they go after it.

Again -- do you really think your average young (or even older) moviegoer really thinks about the movie they're seeing as a "remake"? Do you believe the average 17-year-old is sitting around with their friends saying: "So, let's see .... what's the latest film they've remade? Let's go and see it because I LOVE REMAKES!"...Gee, I'd like to be more Adventurous and try something New, but I just love familiar old movies being re-done!"... ? They don't even know that 95% of them are remakes. They're just going to see whatever "new movies" are being offered them... and if most of what's being offered them are remakes, then guess what? That's what they have to choose from on the menu! I'm sure most of these people are NOT going to the theaters because of "familiarity", and would actually be surprised to learn they'd just seen a movie that was re-made.

As for the original FRIGHT NIGHT, I consider it well better than "okay," but that's coming from a horror fan's perspective. I consider FRIGHT NIGHT (which we soon will have to specify with a "the 1985 version" footnote, sadly) one of the last really good "modern horror movies".

 

[Michael Elliott]

Hmm...I see no evidence of people wanting sequels/remakes/unoriginal ideas. Judging by the top five at the box office it's clear indie, original works are what people want. Travis, you're way off base here my friend. [sarc over]

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Not sure what your point is there, Michael.

 

[TravisR]

Quote:

You're probably right about the awareness of what is a remake amongst the public but that desire for familiarity still extends to Hollywood. They feel more comfortable putting money into something that has already worked before. It's like music sampling- if it was a hit once before, it can probably be a hit again. It's creatively bankrupt but if it worked once, I can see why they think it'll probably work again.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

uote:



Again - you keep bringing up "sequels", and I do not think of them as the same thing as "remakes of old movies". So in this regard, they're all non-remakes, unless I'm mistaken. If the #1 film is SUPER 8, that's not a remake (even though it may feel similar to older films, as many do because there are so few new ideas).


So then, what the studios would have to do is give movies like MIDNIGHT IN PARIS much more exposure to many more screens. And if all Hollywood did was make four other movies in the vein of MIDNIGHT IN PARIS, then there'd be similar box office numbers and chart positions for them, too. People can only choose to see whatever movies they are offered...

 

[TravisR]

People can only choose to see whatever movies they are offered...

Yes but what movies are doing the best? The ones that people have some familiarity with. Even if you want to take sequels or adaptations out of the equation, why would they keep remaking movies? It's not because they're losing money. It's because they know approximately what they'll be getting and they know approximately how much money they can expect to make from it.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by TravisR

You're probably right about the awareness of what is a remake amongst the public but that desire for familiarity still extends to Hollywood. They feel more comfortable putting money into something that has already worked before. It's like music sampling- if it was a hit once before, it can probably be a hit again. It's creatively bankrupt but if it worked once, I can see why they think it'll probably work again.

That theory doesn't work because there are plenty of remakes of older films that were not "classics" or even "overly successful". Was ROLLERBALL a huge hit in its day when they remade that?


It's laziness, and it stinks.

 

[TravisR]

Quote:

That theory doesn't work because there are plenty of remakes of older films that were not "classics" or even "overly successful". Was ROLLERBALL a huge hit in its day when they remade that?

 

It's laziness, and it stinks. 

Sure, it's lazy and it stinks. But in the case of Rollerball or any other failed movie being remade, they can look at the original, see what did and didn't work, fix the broken elements and then they hopefully have a product that makes them money.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by TravisR

People can only choose to see whatever movies they are offered...

Yes but what movies are doing the best? The ones that people have some familiarity with. Even if you want to take sequels or adaptations out of the equation, why would they keep remaking movies? It's not because they're losing money. It's because they know approximately what they'll be getting and they know approximately how much money they can expect to make from it.[/QUOTE]

You're going back and forth on this. Now you're saying that it IS a matter of familiarity with the audiences --- before you were mainly speaking about familiarity with regard to what's a better bet for HOLLYWOOD. But whatever the case, I don't understand people defending the choice to do remakes. It's the dumbing down of America.


And no, they cannot possibly have any idea of aproximately what they expect to make from a remake of FRIGHT NIGHT. Whatever the movie did in 1985 has no bearing on a new generation in 2011.


Which movies are doing the best? Not all remakes and sequels make #1, and not all have made a lot of money. Now, how many "brand new movies with fresh ideas" are being offered in the current Top Ten? Not many -- and if they're not being made and presented as the main option, then they won't make th emoney.


What I'm suggesting is -- IF Hollywood suddenly decided "No More Remakes And Sequels" and only made every single movie as a BRAND NEW IDEA, then we'd still see a Top Five, and those New movies would be the ones that would make Millions. It's not as if the people are going to stop going to the theaters, just because they don't see a remake of LITTlE BIG MAN on the marquee.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by TravisR
Sure, it's lazy and it stinks. But in the case of Rollerball or any other failed movie being remade, they can look at the original, see what did and didn't work, fix the broken elements and then they hopefully have a product that makes them money.

Yeah, sure -- and how many "better than the original" remakes have we actually had in the past 20 years? You know as well as I do that the track record is largely AWFUL for when a remake blows away its original, or is at least AS GOOD. In recent years we've had TRUE GRIT (from what I'd heard), and there's really no point in cherry-picking a handful of titles. (People do this all the time -- usually they point out that Carpenter's THE THING and THE FLY 1986 were better, or sometimes they'll explain that THE MALTESE FALCON was a remake... it's always the same nonsense. But if you consider the hundreds or thousands of modern remakes we've suffered through in the last 20+ years, very few of these were ever nearly as good as their originals... so it's not like Hollywood really cares or even gives a crap about even trying to turn out a good product; they just use the old title).