The Remakes Thread

[Criterion7]

Zombie can make decent films just not remakes or reboots.

Resurrection had a couple of notable scenes but what it was suppose to be was a much more interactive film but the director got his hands tied so the film ended up without any solid focus.

H2 is just incredibly bad film making and it shows that the director really doesn't care. Probably one of the worst ever made.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by cloud

And while I'm here I'll just say that I'm one of the few people who really liked Leatherface: Texas Chainsaw Massacre III. One of the very few people who quite enjoyed Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation and one of the handful of people who absolute hated Tobe Hooper's sequel to the original.

I'm exactly the same, but TCM 2 is a guilty pleasure as I treat it as a comedy rather than a horror film.

[Demoncrat]

Had soft spot for the Friday the 13th one. Twas the bit where he puts on the mask and looks in the mirror (how postmodern I felt at the time)

AND WHO VOTED FOR THE HAUNTING????

BURN THE HERETIC NOW

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

I've just looked at the poll again and realised I mistakenly voted for Day of the Dead and not Dawn of the Dead. D'oh!

[Beyond72]

While I can understand why some like the Friday the 13th remake (It was certainly a lot better than some of the later sequels). I still feel it was a bit of a missed opportunity myself, as I wish they had kept Jason in the shadows for much of the running time like the early Fridays, (and at least used elements of the original score) as I think there was a chance to make a creepy "Friday the 13th" movie (along the lines of Part 2) for a new generation.

[Slippery Jack]

Nearly voted Hills Have Eyes, but went with Psycho . . .

[PaulD]

Originally Posted by Slippery Jack

Nearly voted Hills Have Eyes, but went with Psycho . . .

Banish the heretic!

Seriously though, what did you like about Van Sant's Psycho remake? I didn't loathe it (and at times thought it was interesting the way he had to use old filmmaking conventions like zooming etc in a a modern-made film) but just thought it was ultimately pointless.

[Slippery Jack]

Originally Posted by PaulD

Seriously though, what did you like about Van Sant's Psycho remake?

Yeah I have to defend myself frequently about that one I think it's a fascinating experiment, and I find a peverse enjoyment in the compare/contrast with the original. Plus the supporting cast is excellent (Macy, Forster, Baker Hall, Mortensen, Ron Howards dad...), and I like the varying degrees to which the different actors chose to imitate their 1960 counterparts. The ultra-vibrant Christopher Doyle cinematogtraphy is stunning, and the set/costume design is top notch (it's kind of design porn for me ). Oh yeah, and Danny Elfman's super crisp recording of the classic score sounds ace. Yup, that's what I like about it . . .

[PaulD]

Originally Posted by Slippery Jack

Yeah I have to defend myself frequently about that one I think it's a fascinating experiment, and I find a peverse enjoyment in the compare/contrast with the original. Plus the supporting cast is excellent (Macy, Forster, Baker Hall, Mortensen, Ron Howards dad...), and I like the varying degrees to which the different actors chose to imitate their 1960 counterparts. The ultra-vibrant Christopher Doyle cinematogtraphy is stunning, and the set/costume design is top notch (it's kind of design porn for me ). Oh yeah, and Danny Elfman's super crisp recording of the classic score sounds ace. Yup, that's what I like about it . . .

I can't actually argue with much of that to be honest; they are all things I was intrigued by in the remake. The end result still doesn't justify it for me though. As an experiment rather than an artistic statement the film is interesting. But still, what's the point y'know?

[Slippery Jack]

For me the experiment is an artistic statement of sorts, and the pointlessness is kind of the point . . .