Badmovies.org Forum

Ever see a film and it seems familiar until you realize..Hey! this movie a remake! or even vice versa you watch the film and later find out it was a remake. (this one happens to me a lot) So I ask,  remake versus original which did you like best?

example:

Kairo 2001 (original) Pulse 2006 (remake)
Kairo i liked better very scary and had more emotion.

Oh and here is one more question which movie was first remade? This one has been on my mind all day.

Welcome to the boards, and good first topic!

I think the most famous "remake better than the original" was THE MALTESE FALCON (1941) over the 1931 version.

As for the earliest remake, I bet they started pretty early in Hollywood history.  There is a PRISONER OF ZENDA (1913) and a PRISONER OF ZENDA (1915), but I don't know for sure that one was a remake of the other.  They could have been competing adaptations of the same source material.  (Though I guess the same could be said of the two MALTESE FALCONs).

I like John Carpenter's The Thing more than Howard Hawks' The Thing From Another World.

I also like John Carpenter's Halloween (1978) more than Rob Zombie's Halloween (2007).

Thank you, for the welcome.

I AM LEGEND (2007) over THE LAST MAN ON EARTH (1964) was a little bit better, but i would say almost a tie. I want to say THE OMEGA MAN (1971) is similar to the 2007 remake Ive only read the plot for this so I'm not to sure. Its on my need to watch list.

WILLY WONKA AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY (1971) over CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY (2005) the cg over the top and the tunnel scene its just not that freaky in the new one, Infact nothing happens so boring.

I like Cronenberg's The Fly (1986) more than the original The Fly (1958).

The Thing > The Thing from another World

...Prom Night (New) > Prom Night (Old) (Not a lot to compete with IMO :P)

Willard (2003) > Willard (1970)

The Hills Have Eyes (2006) > The Hills Have Eyes (1977) (By a hair, the remake had plenty of stuff that bugged me)
----
Other stuff I've seen (Which is mostly speaking horror-wise) matches up at best

The Korean horror film A Tale of Two Sisters is a lot better the the US version called The Uninvited.

I actually like The Thing From Another World about as well as Carpenter's The Thing.  They were very different movies, the first one had a lot that appealed to me.  I've never seen the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre or The Hills Have Eyes 2, but I love both of those remakes. 

Black Christmas - the original is one of my faves, but the remake was putrid.
Dawn Of The Dead - love the original, but the remake was kinda meh.
I have absolutely no desire to see the Friday The 13th remake, the My Bloody Valentine remake, NOES 2010, etc., etc. It's kind of a cliche thing to say, but to me, remakes just taint the greatness of the originals.

Don't....even....get....me.....started :hatred:

Just a few:

* THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD is better than THE THING

* The original DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL is better than the remake

* WAR OF THE WORLDS with Gene Barry is better than the Tom Cruise remake (but I like the Tom Cruise one, too).  The low-budget British remake is ambitious, but very bad.

* The original VANISHING POINT is superior to the TV remake.

* The Karloff version of FRANKENSTEIN is better than any remake.

* The Lugosi version of DRACULA is better than any remake.

* The original HALLOWEEN is better than Rob Zombie's version

* Toss up between the original INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and the Donald Sutherland version . . . each has many elements I like.  They are both better than BODY SNATCHERS (but I enjoy that one, too).  THE INVASION with Nicole Kidman is very disappointing.

* The original POSEIDON ADVENTURE is better than POSEIDON.  Both are better than the dismal TV remake.

* THE TIME MACHINE with Rod Taylor is better than the Guy Pearce version.

* Alfred Hitchcock's PSYCHO is better than Gus Van Sant's "recreation."

* Sam Peckinpah's THE GETAWAY is better than the Baldwin/Basinger remake.

* The original WILLARD is better than the Crispin Glover version.

I enjoy:
+ The Thing from Another World over the The Thing.
+ The Ring over Ringu.
+ King Kong (2005) over the original King Kong.
+ Original Halloween over Rob Zombie's Halloween.
+ Disney's The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardobe over the animated and 60s verison.
+ The original The Andromeda Strain over the newest verison.
+ The Jungle Book (Animated) over The Jungle Book (Live Acted)

There are more, but I said enough.

Blasphemer!!!!!!!!

 :buggedout: The horror! The horror!

I agree wholeheartedly.

Easy there!  Just because I like the newest verison of the original, doesn't mean I hate it!  I like both equally and enjoy them.  I just slightly like the newest one more.

The Blob (1958) > The Blob (1988)
The Fly (1986) > The Fly (1958)
The Thing From Another World (1951) > The Thing (1982)
War of the Worlds (1953) > War of the Worlds (2005)
The Time Machine (1960) > The Time Machine (2002)
King Kong (1933) > King Kong (2005) > King Kong (1976)
Island of Lost Souls (1933) > Island of Dr. Moreau (1977)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) > Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) > Body Snatchers (1993)
Attack of the 50 Foot Woman (1958) > Attack of the 50 Foot Woman (1993)
Invaders From Mars (1953) > Invaders From Mars (1986)
Donovan's Brain (1953) > The Brain (1962)
Gojira (1954) > Gojira (1984) > Godzilla 2000 (1999) > Godzilla (1998)
The Lodger (1944) > Man in the Attic (1953)
Nosferatu (1922) > Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)
Night of the Living Dead (1968) > Night of the Living Dead (1990)
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1932) > Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1920) > Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1941)
Phantom of the Opera (1925) > Phantom of the Opera (1943)
Rear Window (1954) > Rear Window (1998)
Mystery in the Wax Museum (1933) > House of Wax (1953)
Ju-on: The Grudge (2002) > The Grudge (2004)
The Man WHo Knew Too Much (1934) > The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)
The Mummy (1932) > The Mummy (1959) > The Mummy (1999)
The Parent Trap (1961) > The Parent Trap (1998)
Zatôichi kenka-tabi (1963) > Zatôichi (2003)
Halloween (1978) > Halloween (2007)

Aside from Zombie's Halloween, I like all those films to some extent. I have yet to watch the remakes of Planet of the Apes, Manchurian Candidate, Friday the 13th, House of Wax (2005), Amityville Horror and several others.

I think very few remakes are worth your time, unless they take the original story idea and attack it from their own angle. Examples of this are THE THING and THE FLY, which are qualitatively different than the original. When they try to tell the same story again, just updated for "modern" audiences they are usually just pointless (and rarely done better). Even then, most of them are not done well. Tim Burton's PLANET OF THE APES is a great example.

I liked Savini's update of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, but other than better special effects, the original is still much more powerful.

I'm not saying they are all bad. Just that most of them are.

Also, for those who decry the remake of FRIDAY THE 13TH: Yes, it was bad, but the nudity level in that movie was leagues and away better than any movie previous. Shallow, I know, but it's the truth.

Well, SOMEBODY had to like it.

Frankenstein (1910) than the 1932
phantom of the Opera 1925 than the 1943

Good call . . . and both are better than the Herbert Lom version from the 1960s.

I actually agree.  I really like both (the original was one of my favorite films growing up, and was what inspired my continuing love of stop motion), but I do like the remake more.  In fact, King Kong was my favorite film of 2005. 

Sorta related, but I keep hearing people online talk about Jackson's King Kong as if it were hated by virtually everyone, ala Gigli or Catwoman or something.  Well, on the IMDB it has a 7.6, Metacritic has it at an 8.1, and on Rotten Tomatoes it's at 83%.  So, that's obviously not true. 

On another note, Godzilla, Godzilla 1984, and Godzilla 2000 are part of a series.  The only remake is the American version.

There are several versions of The Chinese Connection.  Fist of Legend is probably the most famous.  I'm not really a big fan of either film, honestly, but I feel Fist of Legend is the most overrated kung fu film in history - it's only decent.  Overall, I like the original film better.

The remake was way better, even Hitchcock himself said it was.


I didn't like it as much as the original though.

Good topic.

The remake of the The Hitcher was terrible. Nothing can outdo Rutger Hauer's performance in the original.

A less obvious one. City of Angels (1998) with Nicholas Cage and Meg Ryan was a godawful ripoff of a sublime German film by Wim Wenders, Wings of Desire (1987). I wholeheartedly believe Hollywood wanted to pass it off to the gullible general public that this was an original idea.

Possible upcoming remake. Arthur, starring Russell Brand. I like Russell Brand, but please I hope this project falls through. Who the hell could possibly pull off the character of Hobson like John Gielgud?

Heh, forgot about that one.  I thought the Nic Cage film was bland as hell with a real cop-out of an ending, but I still liked it more than Wings of Desire, which I found to be one of the most boring films I've ever seen, despite its gorgeous cinematography and Peter Falk (the best thing about the film).  So, City of Angels wins by a hair. 

It's a perfect example of Hollywoodization at work though.

The Wicker Man < Remake

Yes, I am being dead serious, the original's hokey atmosphere completely pales to the edgier Nic Cage version.

...Kidding.

Yes I do prefer the original The Man Who Knew Too Much...granted it's mostly because of Peter Lorre.

I almost cried. DON'T DO THAT!!!

::gasp::

oh my god that remake was CRAP. maybe even the worst film I've ever seen, haha.

I liked the remake of MBV. didn't get to see it in '3D' just on DVD on normal tv screen, thought it was better than the original. very good gore.

High ratings for Peter Jackson's "King Kong?" Then read "Monster Rally" by Edward Robinson, as there is an essay in it  by S. Michael Wilson called "A Giant Fall: a Critical Look at Peter Jackson's 'King Kong.'" A big fan of Jackson's earlier films, he points out, that this version of the film is too long. Too bloated. Spends too much time on minor characters. Has too much speechifying. Spends too much time one pointless foreshadowing. Has too many scenes that just slow down the pace of the film. All because Jackson, after "Lord of the Rings," stopped being a "filmmaker" and became an "epic filmmaker." Maybe it should have been hated by everyone.

And as in this case, looking at the critical reaction to the film versus that of the audience, (IMHO) audiences are better able to pick out a "good" film than the critics.

My point was exactly that - look at any user based ratings of the King Kong remake and they're also good.  Not fantastic perhaps, but solid.  Exit numbers were also high, IIRC.

For example, on NetFlix the average rating is 3.5/5.  On Box Office Mojo it got a B, with fully half the voters giving it an A.  On the IMDB it has a 7.6 (which is very high with its weighted averages).

So, basically, overall, the critics like it and general audiences like it.  The only people who on the whole DON'T seem to like it are movie enthusiasts on message boards.  And that's fine.  I'm obviously one of those people, just don't agree with 'em this time.  Another example somewhat similar to this is Titanic.  Generally liked by both the public and critics, but lambasted by us movie board peoples.


Are you sure he's not talking about the second two LOTR films?  Those criticisms apply to them as well, particularly Jackon's extended versions.  I'd agree King Kong would be improved by trimming about 20 minutes out of it though (basically eliminate the subplot with Jimmy, that'd be a good start).

No, he was talking about "King Kong." He actually seems to have liked Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings."

I was being facetious.   :twirl: