REMAKES


I think the general sentiment here is that the rehashing of an older movie, or remaking it, is on some levels kind of lazy. However, people used to tell each other stories, passing from generation to generation. Back when we were cave people and proto-people and native peoples, this is how we communicated our wisdom. This oral tradition has evolved with the printing press and computers and internet.... I don't mean to be all highfalutin, but movies are the new myths. I know it's not this simple. There's capitalism at work here. But sometimes remakes are cool, so we can share a new angle on an older story. (Funny Games being an extreme exception.)

The Wicker Man, is an unbelievable film. But the remake, directed by Neil LaBute (maybe he needed some studio money for Lakeview Terrace?) is a horse apple wrapped in a red ribbon. First, there are no songs sung; the songs sung by the children pretty much outline the morals of the island's culture. Second, it stars Nic Cage. He's certainly capable of compelling performances, but since Wild at Heart he's about 2 for 20. (Adaptation. and Lord of War were both written and directed so well that he must have been horse-whipped off set.)

Other weird remake attempts that I've seen are Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Point of No Return, Psycho, Planet of the Apes and City of Angels. Some good attempts are of course The Thing and The Fly, and also Dawn of the Dead, The Italian Job, Manchurian Candidate, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, and Ocean's 11.

The Shining is truly a horse of a different color.

reply

I agree. I am tired of remakes.

reply

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) was not a remake of Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory (1971) - they are both different takes on the same source material, with the 2005 film being the closest to the novel. The same goes for The Shining and even Carrie. It's like Shakespeare's works being made into films; you can't say that every subsequent version is a "remake" of the one previous.

reply