I saw it, and I wish I hadn’t. There were the elements of a half-decent comedy buried in there somewhere, but to set themselves up as a comparison with the original was just crazy. The one starring Alec Guiness and Katie Johnson (with Peter Sellers in a relatively minor role) is comedy perfection – a jewel that should not be touched.
The miniseries remake of The Andromeda Strain was terrible.
Did we watch the same movie? Because the underlying story (Michael Myers torments his sister Laurie Strode and her promiscuous friends in Haddonfield) is unchanged. Rob Zombie just added the ridiculous backstory portion in the beginning.
Some real good nominations here!
I have to echo Psycho, The Wicker Man, Steve Martins’s The Pink Panther, and The Day the Earth Stood Still.
Anyone see the TV miniseries remake of The Shining? Now that peice of crap was an abomination and seriously uncalled for!
Does anybody else see Eastwood’s Pale Rider as a remake of Shane? If so, it’s almost a better remake than the original which is going a long way in the way of praise. I rank Shane near the top of the movies I ever saw. And I rank Pale Rider among Eastwood’s best as well.
This just seemed to be a place to mention it in spite of its being antithetical to the thread’s theme.
Remakes can indeed be good. In some cases, the original had a great concept but the execution was poor.
In other cases, the original concept and execution was good, but setting it in a different context and/or time period puts a whole new spin on it. Ideally, the result is to say “well, you can’t really even compare the two.”
Actually, *Invasion of the Body Snatchers *provides a great example of a good and a bad remake. The 1956 one was awesome and is a very effective cold war allegory. The 1978 version took a different approach–it was more of a psychological thriller than a horror movie. It worked. I think part of the reason that many people like the 1978 version better is that the 1956 version was such a product of its time period, and it must be viewed in historical context.
As far as the 2007 version, titled The Invasion–I haven’t seen it, but everyone says it’s awful. The front page review on the IMDB says “They screwed up one of the scariest concepts ever thought up.” Heh.
I consider that a great remake because it is so far into “so bad it’s good” territory. I love it! I’ve seen it a million times. You ain’t kidding about the terrible performances. If Giovanni Ribisi ever gets an Oscar, he should be immediately stripped of it based on this movie.
I would very much like to see the original.
The most recent King Kong. I never saw the 70’s version. But I caught the one with Jack Black and Naomi Watts and it was ri-freakin-diculous. Absolutley awful, with the worst directing I’ve ever seen. That scene where they swoop in and out on the map of Skull Island made me want to slap everyone involved in the film.
I also agree that the '96 The Scarlet Letter was terrible and completly missed the point of the book. But we did get to see Gary Oldman’s penis, so that’s a plus.
The made-for-TV remake of “The Shining” was pretty awful. Other than the moving topiaries, it was an utter failure. It was more faithful to the book than Kubrick’s version, but then, I thought the book sucked.
It was terrible. It did have one saving grace: JK Simmons, who’s fantastic in everything he’s in. Other than him, it was dreck.
The other thing about this that’s even worse is that in the original, all the mail arrives at the courthouse as an act of providence–one mailroom supervisor comes up with the idea just to clear out all the stored Santa letters, so Kris (through no action of his own or his allies) gets his miracle.
In the TV remake, the mail thing is all David Hartman’s idea–he goes to the USPS and asks that the mail be routed there, so maybe it’s better “lawyering”, but there’s no miracle. For a movie allegedly about faith and belief, this movie demonstrates that neither is as helpful as a savvy attorney. Blech.
The sad thing is that the remake of The Ladykillers was produced and directed by the Coen brothers and starred Tom Hanks.
I thought it was because it had Brooke Adams walking around naked.
The Day the Earth Stood Still and War of the Worlds remakes.
Both terrible imo.
The Remake of “Sahara” with Jim Belushi in the Humphrey Bogart role. Now, Sahara is no epic classic, but it is a charming Desert War yarn directed and photograph very effectively. The remake not only lacked the acting talent, but the director and his crew seemed to think "I have color film…or color videotape! I don’t need anything else 'cause the original was in Black and White and everyone know Color is BETTER…so don’t bother to move the camera or position it in any way that might make a shot interesting. "
And another vote for Rollerball. Failed on so many levels. I have never seen it all the way through but the bits I have seen are laughable and poorly shot.
Whoops! Meant to start a thread! Carry on
…although this almost fits here.
Spartacus.
Remade a few years back for no good reason. And with a huge historical mistake (the strange idea that there was only 1 consul).
[quote=“koufax, post:24, topic:529556”]
[QUOTE]
The Pink Panther with Steve Martin?
[/QUOTE
Sargeant Bilko with Steve Martin
The Out of Towners with Steve Martin[/QUOTE]
and Cheaper by the Dozen, also with Steve Martin
I rented the DVD just so I could see what the fuck he bought in the store in the middle of the movie. It was for birthday party seen only on the DVD. Don’t ASK what it was.:mad:
All signs point to “Clash of the Titans” being better than the original.
Hairspray was a disappointment the second time around, which is kinda weird when you think about it. Don’t bother explaining that it adapted the stage show not the original; the original was every bit as much a musical as the remake.
Disney’s Three Musketeers was inferior in every way to the Richard Lester Three Musketeers movies from the 70s.