1. The HTF Tapatalk application has been discontinued. Please see the thread in the Forum Help & Feedback area for more information.
    Dismiss Notice

Which is more annoying, remake or re-edit?

Discussion in 'Movies' started by Gordon Moore, Oct 24, 2003.

  1. Gordon Moore

    Gordon Moore Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2000
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    0
    So JoBlo.com is reporting that due to the success of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre re-make...Michael Bay is focusing his sites on the Amityville horror....why????

    What was wrong with the original? There's nothing new to bring to the story other than updated fx's.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. TommyT

    TommyT Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Tom


    Yep, I agree. Remakes are more annoying. Sometimes you have to wonder, why do it in the 1st place?

    What you also have to wonder about is why the hell they always pick the most godawful flicks to remake? I watched the orig Chainsaw Massacre recently & I found it pretty boring. It's just as bad as trolling the 70s looking for animated shows to make movies out of.
     
  3. Seth--L

    Seth--L Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    0


    It's one of those movies that's more interesting to talk about (academics love it) than actually watch.
     
  4. Matt Stone

    Matt Stone Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2000
    Messages:
    9,063
    Likes Received:
    1
     
  5. ChuckSolo

    ChuckSolo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, re-makes are getting to be really ludicrous, especially when they remake a movie that is less than say 25 years old. I just shook my head in disgust when someone on this forum reported that a "The Fly" remake was in the works. I just had to ask why. True, there are some great remakes, ala the already mentioned "The Thing." Someone also mentioned that "War of the Worlds" was in for a remake, now that one would be interesting since the TV series of a few years back was pretty lousy.
     
  6. Nick Graham

    Nick Graham Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2001
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amityville is such a horrible movie, especially compared to the book that kept me from being able to sleep in the sixth grade. If done faithfully to the book, it would seem like an entirely different movie.
    I would be all for a remake. Some of the most unnerving stuff in the (admittedly hokey) book was made into hilariously bad unintentional comedy in the movie. Jodie the demon-pig, made flesh using two orange Christmas lights, anyone?

    It's certainly not a horror classic like Psycho, so why the fuss?
     
  7. Ken Seeber

    Ken Seeber Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1999
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    2
    I have to say that re-edits are more annoying.

    When a movie is remade, you still have the original in its unaltered form. I've never seen the remake of "Psycho" and don't intend to. The original remains as great as it has ever been.

    But with re-edits you run the risk of directors disavowing the original versions we love and even removing them from distribution forever. See the "Star Wars" trilogy and "Apocalypse Now" as examples.
     
  8. Robert Anthony

    Robert Anthony Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    3,218
    Likes Received:
    0
    Weird--the title of this thread has almost nothing to do with the question you're asking in the post.

    Anyway, as far as Bay tackling Amityville Horror--I'm all for it. The first movie was garbage. The book was well written (fake as hell, as was proven later, but still a very entertaining read) and there's plenty to take from the book that you could craft into a much more entertaining movie than that waste of celluloid starring James Brolin and Margot Kidder.

    As a matter of fact, the only problem with remakes is that people try to remake movies that are ALREADY great. Wouldn't it be easier to find an old movie with a great premise and horrible execution, look at it, find out what the mistakes are, and then go from THERE to finally do justice to the premise? Why don't more people try to make bad movies from the past as opposed to making good movies less good by "re-interpreting" them?

    That's not to say I don't think they shouldn't be allowed to try. You never do know, and I'm always open to the idea that someone maybe actually DID something with already great material to make it just as enjoyable. But more often than not, tackling a classic and trying to "update" it ends up making the new product cloying and false feeling.

    But I like to take it on a film by film basis, and if the film we're talking about is Amityville horror, then by all means, give him the greenlight. It can't hurt the turd the original is.
     
  9. Todd Phillips

    Todd Phillips Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2000
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yup, someone should change the title to include "Amityville remake".
     
  10. Steve Christou

    Steve Christou Long Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2000
    Messages:
    15,710
    Likes Received:
    381
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    Real Name:
    Steve Christou
    Wondering which remake is the closest in years to the original, not counting remakes of foreign language films. Red Dragon (2002) might win the prize, it was made just 16 years after the original, Manhunter (1986).

    Winner of 'most pointless remake of all time' has to be Gus Van Sant's Psycho (1998), a shot for shot copy of Hitchcock's still scary classic, at least if he had put his own stamp on it added a few ingenious tweaks to the story it might have been worthwile, but no, even the script was exactly the same.
     
  11. Todd Phillips

    Todd Phillips Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2000
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Robin Hood seems to be one of the most filmed stories, and it was filmed lots of times in the twenties and thirties. Just do an IMDB search on "Robin Hood". I think it is still done once every 15 or 20 years.
     
  12. Dick

    Dick Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    May 22, 1999
    Messages:
    6,044
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Location:
    Maine
    Real Name:
    Rick
    And, of course, the entire Amityville business turned out to be a H-O-A-X. But, hey, I think it's great Michael Bay is concentrating on this sort of project...it's where he belongs, at the bottom of the barrel, instead of clobbering us with another vacuous and pretentious epic.
     
  13. Gordon Moore

    Gordon Moore Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2000
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  14. Kevin Porter

    Kevin Porter Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2002
    Messages:
    948
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re-edit. If you don't want to see the remake you don't have to. But in the case of Star Wars, you're stuck with it. I suppose in some cases they are equally annoying though.
     

Share This Page