MovieChat Forums > The Fog (2005) Discussion > poster child of how much a remake can su...

poster child of how much a remake can suck

posted 14 years ago by NolanSorrento
6 replies | jump to latest

I'm not against remakes, that doesn't mean I don't see a lot of them as inferior to the original, I just don't get my panties in a bunch over it since I'm usually not the sucker who went out and paid to see it in the theater.

This flick though.... holy sh/t!, if a person ever wanted to prove how sequels are just pointless waste of studio money this would be the perfect example; The CW style story, the pointless re-incarnation plot added to this update - EVERYTHING was just crap!

This steaming pile of dung isn't even worthy of a lazy sunday morning watch on cable.

Brought to you by Carl's Jr

[–] Good_Citizen 13 years ago

I'm sorry that you are alive.

[–] NolanSorrento 13 years ago

Your mom should have swallowed you

Brought to you by Carl's Jr

[–] daughterofolaf 12 years ago

You are correct. Not only is this a crap movie, it is a prime example of someone given an opportunity to improve on a mediocre original and instead of doing that it simply flushes the opportunity down the toilet.

"Rock 'n roll martian!"

[–] TheSolarSailor 12 years ago

The original is a bit weak on story, but strong on everything else such as atmosphere, cinematography, music, the cast, the locales, etc. All of these elements are missing in the new film, though the story tries to actually flesh things out a bit. I don't blame the screenplay so much as the director who dropped the ball on all the elements that could have made this film memorable.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

[–] daughterofolaf 12 years ago

I think that is a fair assessment.

"Rock 'n roll martian!"

[–] TheSolarSailor 12 years ago

I gave this remake a second chance last week and that is where I noticed that the overall story wasn't that bad at all, but that it was the director's lack of ability to bring it to the screen in a decent fashion that truly crippled it. Now I am not saying the script was perfect, as it still had gaffs in logic here and there, most notably the whole deal with the video camera evidence and how stupidly that was handled, as well as the end where Elizabeth just turns into a ghost. These things could have easily been fixed, though, and certainly filmed better.

I love the original film, but my love of it doesn't make me ignore its weaknesses. In that film, Elizabeth serves no purpose other than to just hang around and scream. It was a criminal under-use of Jamie Lee Curtis. The townsfolk who file through to see the statue all just disappear as the fog enters town moments later. The fog seeks out our cast and ignores the rest of the town, hence the reason this new film sought to explain why it went after who it did. It's a great atmospheric ghost tale, but not without its own issues. It's not as tightly written as Halloween was. Still, I do adore it.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?