Remakes:Not all have to Suck

[Dr. X, Yyz, Sr...]

tsk tsk.... I was thinking just now,....I would LOVE to sit and watch two movies with you one day. One of your choice and one of mine. I think that maybe we would agree more in real life than in "type".

[Funk, E.]

Remakes aren't always a bad idea. I've watched plenty of movies that fell into to the "this COULD have been good" category that I though disserved another shot. However, I think remaking a classic is a bad idea in principle. Casablanca, Sabrina, Psycho among others do not need to be nor should they be remade.

Now Logan’s Run… That should be remade :-)

[Deej]

Funk, E. wrote:
>
> Now Logan’s Run… That should be remade :-)

I don't know if you're serious or if you're being facetious, but I say HELL YEAH!
I'd kill my old granny for a remake of Logan's Run(I'd probably do it for any other reason too). I would also tune in to a new Logan's Run tv series, of course I think Veritas:The Quest is goooooood watchin', so maybe my taste is a bad gauge.

[Funk, E.]

No, I actually think that Logun's Run could, in fact, be remade into an excellent movie. The premise of population control via ageist euthanasia coupled with a computer controlled society that's slowly malfunctioning would make for a great (dare I say it) "hard SciFi" movie.

[Evan3]

Who is that adressed to Dr.??? Me or Deej?????

[murder by girl]

Psycho was a realy cool remake!I dont think they could of done anything to make it any better.The guy that played Norman Bates realy turned me on! know 1 will beat hitchcock hes god

[murder by girl]

you took the words out of my mouth! i totaly agree texas rules! nothing could be added,changed or taken away from that movie to make it any better only bad would come from it. You seem like a cool guy/girl

[onionhead]

Regarding Little Shop of Horrors, I also prefer the original quirky Roger Corman flick, although whenever Steve Martin starts crooning "I am Your Dentist" in the remake I end up howling.  But who could improve on a young Jack Nicholson in the dentist chair, paying for pain and at the brink of drill-induced orgasm?
Most remakes to me are like most of Mariah Carey's stuff--pointless remixes that are targeted at none but a single audience.  If yer a Mariah fan, then you'd buy anything, even the "Glitter" soundtrack; if yer a CGI nutcase, then you have yer pantsful of fx laden material out there these days--The Haunting, 13 Ghosts.  Gimme black and white, blast Ted Turner's colorizing to hell, and pass the beer.



Post Edited (04-03-03 11:21)

[Dr. X, Yyz, Sr. -]

ooops. sorry. you Evan :)

[Evan3]

All right man, you are on. My movie will be better (hmmm should we watch Deep Blue Sea or Star Trek Insurrection..... jk)

[Dr. X, Yyz, Sr. .]

Whatever it ends up being it would be a blast. I talk to the screen regardless of what is on. (and NO I'm not shcitzophrenic) hehehehehe

[Squishy]

For Onionhead: if you don't have it already, try to find the soundtrack of the "Little Shop of Horrors" Broadway musical. You'll not only forget Martin, the ending is more in line with the spirit of the original movie. (Frank Oz changed it after test audiences--ugh--whined.)

Here's an unusual case: I've seen both versions of "(The) Hurricane"--not the Denzel Washington/"Hurricane" Carter movie, but the 1937 Dorothy Lamour and 1979 Mia Farrow "forbidden-south-sea-romance" movies--hated both and don't care if it's ever remade again.

[BoyScoutKevin]

Not only is the colour version of "Prisioner of Zenda" better then the silent film version, I thik it is better then the black-and-white version from 1937 (IMHO), even if the colour version from 1952 was a shot-by-shot remake of the 1937 version. Then again, I much prefer Stewart Granger and James Mason in anything, as opposed to Ronald Colman and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. in anything.

[Deej]

BoyScoutKevin wrote:

> Not only is the colour version of "Prisioner of Zenda" better
> then the silent film version, I thik it is better then the
> black-and-white version from 1937 (IMHO), even if the colour
> version from 1952 was a shot-by-shot remake of the 1937
> version. Then again, I much prefer Stewart Granger and James
> Mason in anything, as opposed to Ronald Colman and Douglas
> Fairbanks, Jr. in anything

Gonna have to disagree with that one. I like both the '37 and the '52 versions, but I think the '37 film is somehow better. Could be because It's the first version I saw.
I also think that Colman and Fairbanks as the hero-villain combo are excellent and that's in addition to the other members of the fine cast. Well,anyway, it's good to find someone else who has seen the films, everyone thinks I'm talking about a video game when I mention them.

[BoyScoutKevin]

I think most people would agree with you, Deej, but, I might like the 1952 version better, because that was the first version I saw. And I sure like Stewart Granger and James Mason much better then Ronald Colman and Douglas Faribanks, Jr.
Though, I have enjoyed the films of the last two as well.
The book upon which all the films were based is a great book, and so is the lesser known sequel to it "Rupert of Hentzau."
Enjoy the films and enjoy the books.