Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

aww... I guess I'm the only one here who has love for the original The Thing From Another World? granted Carpenter made a great movie and yeah it's probably better even though Wilford Brimley's in it, but the original still has some class. It's one of the classic 50s scientists vs. common sense movies... Giant plant-alien-creature hell bent on killing us all? save it! for science!!!

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

yes it easy money making - and hence lazy...in my book

its the same with music and taking a twenty year old sample and adding a beat and rereleasing it - its all about money, but its very lazy...and unimaginative...

you can appreciate a good original movie, without having to go and remake it...

a crap movie then should remain a crap movie and not be revisited...

there are plenty of decent new movies being made without the call for more crappy remakes...

what was the last decent remake that you saw....

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

in no particular order

Psycho
Ocean's 11
Dawn of the Dead

There might be one or two i'm forgetting

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

pyscho - you sure...

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

Yes I am very sure.

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

:D



ok...i thought it was very poor

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

Well, that just like, your opinion man.

Yeah, most people do seem to consider the remake to be utter shite, and it is not something that was really necessary, but I didn't mind it so much.

I think my liking of the film stems more from the experiment Gus Van Sant was attempting with the film.

Oh, and renowned drunkard and amazing Cinematographer Christopher Doyle shot the film too.

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

Remakes besides being a matter of money as B.miller said, are about "re-interpretration". And i want to think that is totally possible to have one story with many interpretations.

Like Solaris.. The original and the remake were both amazing. I guess i a matter of the power of the story too, like Psycho.

The examples given (Texas Chainsaw Massacre...!) about remaking aren't the strongest ones to judge if "remakes" are lazy filmaking or not i think.

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

ooooooo, I completley forgot about Solaris. And another fine example Gforgroove. That one ties directly into the "re-interpretation" category as Steven Soderbergh went back to the source material of Stanislaw Lem's novel and made a new adaptation.

Re: Remakes Lazy Film-making?
 

a friend of mine (who doesn't mind remakes at all since he hates old movies... but he also loved Armageddon) always brings up the argument that a remade movie is just like a remix of a song. I do think that makes for a good comparison to decide if a movie remake is good or not, but in most cases the metaphor doesn't quite hold. The Longest Yard for example, would be akin to adding a hi-hat and calling it a remix. The Thing on the other hand, would be like Basement Jaxx's remix of Technologic, where it definitely sounds like the Jaxx but also has that original spine in there. It's changed to the point where it can stand on its own as a track. I think the reason why all remakes always get compared to the originals is because so many of them cannot stand on their own. Since reading your guys' War of the Worlds responses, I've been thinking about why i really didn't mind the characters and how the aliens die... and i think it's because I was familiar with the story already. The characters certainly aren't the same but they're like the remix element... trying the story with treated vocals instead of the originals... so I was really coming at it like that and not as a stand-alone film. I mean, that's not necessarily bad because I ended up liking it for the most part, but it's definitely a different angle to look at it from.

I don't know though, because even a great remix, when compared to a great original song, kind of pales for me. I would much rather have a new story than an old one told differently.

just rambling :)