Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies' started by Joey Gunz, Feb 10, 2004.
And the remakes keep on coming... From "comingsoon.net":
Whoa...that's something I didn't expect to see. I'll probably just stick with the original.
There is no way they'll be able to replicate the mood and tension of this picture. Even Carpenter himself can't do it anymore ...
So this is the fad now, is it ? Remaking all our beloved 70s cult favourites ? So we've had TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (pointless), and now we've got DAWN OF THE DEAD (trailer's ok), HALLOWEEN and ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 on the way. Any more ? I'll bet they end up remaking TAXI DRIVER with Colin Farrell as Travis Bickle. Did you ever see what a .44 magnum can do to a studio executive's face ? That you should see.
THE HILLS HAVE EYES is getting remade as well.
The only problem I have with the original is that the assault didn't occur at precinct 13. Besides that, it was awesome.
Think they'll have the little girl getting wasted returning her ice cream
scene in this politically correct society?
Sad really. Back when directors had balls.
One of my top 10 favorite films of all time, Rosemary's Baby, is another one being remade. Either way, I think the Dawn remake looks spectacular, and I don't mind the bad ones, as the originals aren't hurt. If they were, it'd be a different story. Anyways, I read about the Assault remake, and immediately came to the conclusion that this remake is destined to be awful. I also have to agree, there's no way the remake will have that very effective scene.
If the remake doesn't have Carpenter's cool theme music, you can just ferget it.
I am sorry I liked Laurence in 'The Matrix" but I can't see him as a target, it was better IMHo to have the John Carpenter script. The blood oath made sense so did the attack for the killing of one of their own even if he killed the child, this was the basis of the blood oath (To the Death).
How do you think they'll explain why none of the characters have cell phones? I realize not everyone has a cell phone (we don't) but in this day and age, most cops probably have them, and at least one or two of the other characters should. Blair Witch got around that by setting the movie in 1994, when very few people had cell phones, and still many viewers screamed and bitched about how "why didn't they have/use cell phones??" If some people won't accept a *year* as an explanation, what logical explanation could the writers come up with for 13? Are the bad guys going to knock down the cell tower? Will the entire station (an older station that's being closed) have some sort of jamming device? Are they going to shoot down a satellite? Is the snow thwarting the signals? Or, damn, everyone just happened to leave theirs at home that day? Did everyone forget to change their batteries? Maybe New Yorkers (or, ha, Canadians) just don't use cell phones in 2004 like the rest of the country does. God, my brain cells are popping just thinking of these things.
I just watched this flick two days ago and I loved it. This remake (and the many others like it) is what's wrong with the world of movies today. I mean AOP13 was a remake of Rio Bravo but it's not a straight remake. Hey if they like the idea great. But come up with a new and interesting twist on things. There is no way that this movie could ever be made as well today, especially in today's PC world.
I personally think John Carpenter already remade "Assault on Precinct 13" a few years ago with the futuristic "Ghost of Mars" movie. "Ghost of Mars" shares many similarities with "Assault on Precinct 13". Most noticeably the fact that once again, cops and cons join forces while under siege from a relentless enemy at a police station.