MovieChat Forums > See No Evil, Hear No Evil (1989) Discussion > see no evil, hear no evil. remake

see no evil, hear no evil. remake

posted 19 years ago by dareng-2
14 replies | jump to latest

remakes of movies are good. besides "phsyco", that was one of the worst ideas for a remake. "lets remake a movie." "and do exactly the same as the first one" "the same scenes, same directions, same everything!". now thats terrible. im saying remake see no evil, hear no evil. not as a "remake" but as an updated version of the movie. for the newer audiences. i do agree. most remakes suck. but i just watched the movie twice today. and it has never been funnier. now to respect the genius of gene wilder and richard pryor, dont you think we owe it to them to keep the essence of this woderfull peice of artwork alive in the spirits of our kids and their children? not everyone can relate to a movie that was made 20 years ago. its sad to say but, this classic car of a movie needs a modern engine. thats all i have to say. and why doesnt goerge lucas redoo episdoes 4,5,6? my children love the new star wars. but they ask, is there any more of the star wars movies and i tell them yes. but when they "tried" to watch them, it was unberrible. i know this is a touchy subject. but what about the next generation? are they going to be stuck wanting to see the AWSOME BATTLES OF THE REPUBLIC? and just dreaming of the adventures han and chewy had? well anyways. dont get mad, these are just words.

[–] Brodie250 19 years ago

I wholeheartedly agree. I often really enjoy movies but feel like I could enjoy them even more if they were updated. For example, the other day I was watching Shawshank Redemption and I couldn't help but notice that I was no longer drawn into it like I used to be. Hollywood really needs to start updating some of these great movies, because right now I'm finding it hard to get into them. I mean the above poster is right, Hear no evil is 17 years old. Shawshank is already 12. How can a movie still be viewed when it was released that long ago? I would also recommend remaking the following movies: the Godfather, Pulp Fiction, the Usual Suspects, Goodfellas, Silence of the Lambs, and Se7en. At this point I've found that most of those have become unwatchable.

[–] ninomontagna 19 years ago

godfather, pulp fiction, usual suspects, goodfellas, silence of the lambs and seven??? are you crazy??? most of the aforementioned are timeless classics with some performances (marlon brando, kevin spacey, robert deniro etc. etc.) that could never be matched. if you want to avoid the fiascos that were the remakes of psycho and planet of the apes then do not remake these movies.

remaking godfather in particular would border on blasphemous! a horse's head in your bed for suggesting this.

maybe they should remake james cameroon's up-coming movie avatar as well - its due out in 2008.

ps: if your post was sarcastic, i apologize for not catching it, but if it wasn't my above remark stands.

[–] Brodie250 18 years ago

It was sarcastic, but I wouldnt feel too bad about it. It was just a different approach to responding in the same was you did. To be quite honest I am just flat out sick of remakes. I keep trying to figure out why they can't leave classic movies alone and then I'll read a message by someone who shares the same opinions as the original poster and it becomes clear to me. Some people actually want them. It scares me a little. But once again, my post was all in good fun and pretty much what you stated in your line about the Avatar, I mean where exactly do people draw the line?

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Brodie250 18 years ago

stuart-mccaw is using a third classic technique. Quick and to the point. Now that sarcasm, in depth explanation, and bluntness have been explored I think it is finalized, all remakes suck.

[–] shuichi_shindosan 18 years ago

Im going to have a little bit of fun. dareng-2 - Are you the craziest person I have ever heard of. Your children wont watch this movie because it was made 17 years ago. They are entitled to that. But when they grow up, there kids will be exactly the same, and they will get pi**ed of about it. I think your kids are riduculous! If someone cant except that a movie is original, and doesnt need a remake, then they shoudlnt watch movies at all. Your kids wont watch Star Wars eps 4, 5, 6 because they are old! Bloody hell, shoot me with a dagger! Why dont we remake E.T then? Are your kids stupid? The original triology looks older and is older for this reason:

1.) It was made a while back and....
2.) They are meant to look older than the newer ones. The newer ones take place before the Universe gets taken over by the dark side of the force. So, even George Lucas cant remake them, reason being he will be forced to change it a little. It will be more advanced, even if Lucas didnt want it to be, it will be uncontroulable.

See no evil, Hear no evil is awesome, shouldnt be messed with. Even if winy little kids cant stand older films. Just let them go back into there cosy little seats and watch remakes of Revenge of the Nerds and game adaptations of Halo etc.......While we can respect the original movies.

And if you are wondering, I am not some adult who comes on here because he hates children. I am a 15 year old boy, who thinks remakes suck. And i think your kids should think the same, if they dont now, they will when they become 25!

Gerard Depadieu "Get the Hedgehog, pump.....Arse.....Pump up Arse!"

[–] cheebspacecowgirl 18 years ago

does the term 'classic' mean nothing to u people? *smh*

[–] sam___webb 18 years ago

are you joking? Remake the star wars episodes, they were better than the new 3, only thing better about the new ones is the CGI.

I Thought it movie was funny it doesnt need to re-made. What parts would a young audiance not understand your children are probably just to young. This film is a 15 anyway. I dont recall anything becing specific to the time period.

[–] themanis33 18 years ago

I agree with most of these people in here, im a teenager but i still love this movie, so if i can like it ur kids can like it. If they are not yet teenagers then they probobly wont understand some of the humour anyway so its pointless, but no a remake of this movie would be a waste of money, this movie rocks just the way it is

[–] gabbyevs 11 years ago

if kids cant except films were made before they born thats the parents fault

i watched lots of classics growing up mainly musicals but never said oh this is too old

its a wonderful life wa sout before my parents were born and it sone of the greatestfilms of all time
i dont like remakes for the sake of it never have-this film is classic acting and noone can replicate wilder and pryors chemistry

[–] blazing_jib 18 years ago

The only problem with remaking a good "buddy" comedy is you need actors that can pull it off, I was watching this movie last night actually but I would have to say that the "onscreen chemistry" between Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor is unmatchable. I dont think I have ever seen two people that have starred in more than one film together and have been just as funny in both.. There are good actors out there that could pull it off with extras but I just dont think that there would be two that could work together like these two guys could

[–] tuffguy98 18 years ago

This has got to be the saddest thread I've ever seen.

[–] sights0d 13 years ago

Perhaps the "unberrible" thing they were talking about was your grammar/spelling/punctuation?

How can you claim children who didn't like the original Star Wars movies? If they were my kids, they'd be out of the house.

I don't think this movie would translate over well to modern audiences. At all. It is what it is. If they cannot fathom the late 80s, so be it.

Plus, I think every disabled group out there would be out for blood if they remade this film. It's REALLY inappropriate in how it portrays people with disabilities.

[–] paul_tachian 13 years ago

Remakes? Puke. Hollywood HAS run out of ideas and they've publicly admitted it for years. The only upside is the financial windfall and forgettable career vehicles for contracted actors.
The viewer is treated with contempt.

One recent exception: The new Muppet movie, but then it's more of a sequel isn't it?

In the case of this classic buddy movie, who could they possibly cast? Kevin James and Arsenio Hall? Come on.

Also, it was made in 1989. What's so foreign about this period of recent history? What's so out-dated that the short of attention span need sexing-up? The clothing? Not really. Certainly the cars and the relative lack of technology used (old computer terminals, no cell phones etc).

In reality, this is a story of friendship under ridiculous circumstances. The protagonists have their own attitudes to their respective disabilities and this is established near the beginning of the film.
So I say a big screw you to anyone who wants to criticise on that level.

Leave it alone. The film already exists, cannot be improved and is available on DVD and VHS. Let today's and future generations enjoy the original for what it is.