In a sense, WUD has already been remade, albeit unofficially. It's called PENTHOUSE NORTH, a Netflix movie about a blind woman who gets terrorized by two thugs out to find stolen diamonds in her NYC apartment. It's modernized, throws out the con man charade for more physical torture from the start, and... is honestly boring compared to the 1967 movie, lacking the colorful characterizations and slow burn quality that make the Terence Young film so beloved.
To be honest, WUD is unlikely to be remade in any official capacity. Firstly, it's too old-fashioned-- or at least, it tends to be perceived as such. The attempt to revive it on Broadway in the late 1990s was met with negative reviews, mostly for Quentin Tarantino as Roat but also because the critics saw the story as too "dated." While the enduring popularity of the film version among classic movie geeks and the ongoing revival of the play on community and school stages shows that it's apparently not too "dated" for everyone, I don't think that's enough to warrant Hollywood's attention for a remake.
Secondly, it has no nostalgia value for the audiences Hollywood wants to court. Most remakes are of properties from the 80s and 90s now. A thriller from the 1960s is less likely to merit interest.
And-- I am totally okay with this. I love WUD. I think it's a near-perfect film and it's not being "modern" is part of its appeal. The changes Hollywood would make would likely just spoil it. Adding more jumps and "scares" would ruin the way Knott paces the action and builds tension. WUD works so well because it is a slow-burn thriller, made before horror movies had to have several jump scares to keep the attention-challenged audience from looking down at their phones. And I think having several jumps only dillutes their impact: that last scare in WUD works as well as it does because there is no other moment like it in the entire movie. That is why it is a shock.
So no remakes, please.
reply
share