MovieChat Forums > Assault on Precinct 13 (2005) Discussion > imbecile movie ... what were the re-make...

imbecile movie ... what were the re-makers allowed to do ?

posted 17 years ago by wmjahn
10 replies | jump to latest

Just saw this incredible poor "re-make" and simply can´t believe anybody not completely brain-dead could do such plot-changes without being forced to do so ...

I mean, the storyline has changed from possible to completely unbelieveable, the music is utterly poor, and there´s nothing from the classic Carpenter-dialogue ("got a smoke?") in it.

Why?

I just asked myself, if the right-holder(s) to the original (Carpenter) did not allow to make a straight re-make, in other words only sold the basic storyline, the core of it (the closing precinct and the title), but did not allow to re-use his classic music, the dialogue and even his straight-forward storyline.

OK, it might sound far-fetched, but is it unthinkable?

Does anybody know if the re-make is that terribly imbecile/poor/junk/dreck, because literally everbody involved was just plain simply braindead or are there legal causes (contracts) that forbid the re-makers to use more elements from the original ?

[–] carloski2003 17 years ago

!978 was nearly 30 years ago
this is a modern remake which means you need to modernise the story line to fit cultural traits of the time of the movie.

Smoking if you hadn't noticed is not as cool as it used to be. and has been on a heavy decline in cinema since your nostalgic grip on the original.

[–] wmjahn 17 years ago

Hm, hmmmmmm ...

You know both movie, it seems? And you think the "re-issue" is better than the original ? Has a better ("modernised") storyline, is logical, fits cultural traits ... pardon me asking, but I am just curious. :-)

I am not a smoker (which is unimportant for this discussion anyway), but I do not see, what´s so bad to have a cigarette in a movie? Yeah, yeah, we are living in times, were each and every thing is regulated, if not by law, then by something called "political correctness". It is just boring (but you are probably accustomed to it so much - or too young - that you find this normal ...).

Besides I don´t wanna see "Joe Average" in a movie, but that is all I get there today: Harrison Ford is a carpenter turned actor (he has nothing to do with this junk, but is a prime example for an actor just having made junk for well over a decade), Ethan Hawke looks like a bookkeeper (or a cop waiting until the day is over), Gabriel Byrne is another "Joe Average" and has not been in aynthing worthwhile since "Miller's Crossing" (which is at least one good movie) and Laurence Fishburne knows eactly one expression for his face: tyring to look cool (since the 80ies, in fact - and without any visible success).

A "perfect" cast for such a re-make.

Did I already mention that this did not even get a theatrical release over here in Europe, it went straight to DVD, as all junk goes.

The ORIGINAL however, is simply wow! Thanx God it still runs on TV every few months and its contant and regular airing has not been threatened (as re-issues usually do) by the poor re-make. It is so bad that even TV-stations don´t air it (at least overe here in Europe). :-)

In the 70ies you had so many cool guys that someone like DARWIN JOSTON aka Napoleon Wilson could be wasted as a driver and transportation Captain for quite some time. Now I could say that the re-issue would have desperately needed someone as cool as him to carry the picture and not the crap-actors you have today ... but then again this new "storyline" could not have been carried by anyone anyway, regardless how cool he is (I guess the few better actors of these days turned the offered parts down).

And so GOT A SMOKE is still one of THE top lines in cinema history and every movie-buff and wanna-be movie buff knows where it comes from and is not affected by something called "politcal correctness". :-)

(I am pretty sure anyway that Carpenter simply did not allow to make a straight re-make of his masterpiece, that is why the "re-issue" is actually only a use of his title and would Carpenter have allowed the use of his old storyline, then GOT A SMOKE would be there, because even PC would not have prevented anybody in his right mind to not use such a geat line - there are still enough smokers in todays movies, just watch more closely :-) ).

[–] carloski2003 17 years ago

your clearly very stubborn and trying to generate nothing but an arguement
since you don't what a productive discussion.

READER BEWARE BAIT THREAD!!

[–] wmjahn 17 years ago

You are not intelligent enough to follow an argument.

[–] mw7301 17 years ago

I agree with you, this movie was just bad on so many levels. It reminds me a lot of the remake of the Andromeda Strain that came out last week, same basic story with a totally politically correct reshuffle of the major story elements to the point of being just terrible.

[–] wmjahn 17 years ago

Thanx for your agreement !! :-) Seems the ones who love the re-issue can not stand the original (and can not cope with different opinions, smile) ...

But Carpenter is Carpenter, he has (had) his own style, which can not be copied easily (even now by himself, I should add). I don´t know if I have mentioned that already, but in an interview, given on the back-cover of the ASSAULT-score LP-release, he states that he saw it recently and thought is was a "slow" movie, he´d do it different today ... well well, good Lord, this movie has absolutely PERFECT pacing, on the spot dialogue, cool acting, great B-guys and chicks, what would ANYBODY wanna change ?? (the re-do had NONE of this).

I guess Carpenter actually explained why his todays movies are not as good (by far not) as his earlier work ...

In that context, the re-make of THE FOG sunk as well, but did get a theatrical release over here = In Europe, it played ... 2 weeks, then it was past. I guess 200 people saw it, if at all. :-)

And indeed they did a re-do of ANDROMEDA STRAIN ?!! The TV-mini(?) with 3 hours, eh ? I can not voice any other view than that obviously them guys at Hollywood have absolutely no, none new ideas ?!!

I stick to the last golden days and watch the 60ies, 70ies stuff and if not these, then gimme some b/w from the 30ies and 40ies, like I AM A FUGITIVE FROM THE CHAIN GANG ! Man, they did make movies back then, back then they really had a punch, got me right into the stomach, movies like this. :-))

[–] spidysense97-1 17 years ago

I don't know, i gave this movie a C average, because it had decent action to it, but the characters were weak. Laurence Fishburne, Ethan Hawke, John Leguizamo, and Maria Bello were the only ones i liked in the movie. I like Gabriel Byrne, but he just didn't do anything for me in this movie. I just plain do NOT like Ja Rule. He cannot act, and his rap is not popular to me. Drea de Matteo is hot and i like her, but i just didnt really care for her in this one. Brian Dennehy i like as well, but he was too much like his character in "First Blood". Fishburne played his character well, Ethan Hawke played his the best, John Leguizamo is an underrated actor, and Maria Bello was extremely hot and good in this movie, and i'm not a huge fan of her either. The plot was admirable, but if they were gonna remake the John Carpenter version, they needed to make it a street gang again, not corrupt cops. They needed better convicts too. Leguizamo was the only one i liked. They could've given the role of Smiley to a more admirable actor, but the female crook i kinda liked. They just needed at least 2 more convicts, and one more young cop like Hawke. I bought this on DVD for $1.99, so i'm not complaining, i'll watch it on a rainy afternoon just to pass time.

"Imagination is the Figment"

[–] aletannu 17 years ago

This is a very good movie. The acting is very good, too.
Usually, a remake is a fresh copy of the old one. This movie is not quite a remake as long as it suffered major changes. Let's just say it is inspired from the old one.
Instead of wasteing your time comparing this one with the first one, you'd better watch it as a "movie", not as a "remake".

[–] Dyers-Eve 16 years ago

I agree with wmjahn this movie was really bad.
Crap plot, bad acting, really bad casting and a bad score.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I say the future is ours... If YOU can count

[–] CrazyToaster 16 years ago

As a remake, sure it was different. But that in no way makes it a terrible movie. It's in no way as well made and memorable as the original, but atleast they tried something new and didn't simply copy John Carpenters classic and make it terrible.

"I believe whatever doesn't kill you simply makes you... stranger." The Joker