What "scary" movie/book do you want remade/rebooted?

Cafe Society
1

I use the term “scary” instead of “horror” purposely, so as not to be constrained by genre (for all I know, you may consider some black comedy or Western scary).

I’m giving you much latitude with your choices. You can choose to redo a movie that you thought should have been better, or a movie that you loved that you want to see updated. You may also choose a scary novel that has yet to be turned into a movie, but you want it to be. Special bonus points awarded if you choose director and cast, or any other film-making jobs (e.g. cinematographer).

My story:
I saw The Exorcist at age 16 when it first opened (lines around the block). It scared the pants off of me (figuratively speaking). No movie has come close to scaring me to that degree since then. I like to be scared, so I’ve been extremely disappointed in scary movies for decades, to the point I rarely seek them out any more (I’ll take any suggestions in case I actually missed some good ones).

Jaws (just the first one, the rest sucked) and Alien (just the first one, the rest sucked) did manage to put me into considerable high *anxiety *mode. They (along with The Exorcist) are high-quality movies in general, just not overly scary.

Off-topic Sidebar: IMO there has been exactly one movie sequel that comes close or equals the quality of the original and that is, of course Godfather II (though I can’t quite call that a “scary” movie).

I would *love *to see re-makes of both The Exorcist and Jaws. I loved them both, but would like to see them again with modern casts and film-making techniques (special effects, etc.). It would, however, be particularly difficult to improve on the cast of Jaws and I can’t yet think of which modern actors I’d choose (Maybe Gary Oldman for Brody and Matthew McConaughey for Hooper, but I’d need to bring Robert Shaw back from the dead to play Quint—he was absolutely brilliant).

I’m not sure who I’d re-cast for The Exorcist, or who I’d have direct either movie. Ideas? Spielberg did an admirable job with Jaws, but may have simply stumbled by luck upon what made that movie so exceptionally suspenseful: very little on-screen time for the shark. Apparently he planned to show the shark more but, as the story goes; mechanical problems forced them to show it less. And that right there is a main problem why so many scary movies fail to scare: they show too damn much of the monster. Why is that not obvious to so many directors? Give the monster minimal airtime, and when you do show him, just show mainly bits and pieces of him (like a shadowed eye, or a salivating beak, or a mucous dripping anal gland…). The audience’s imagination will always outdo special effects. And, use less CGI—it’s getting quite good, but is still shy of 100% believability.

And, if you want to scare me, lose the vampires, ghosts, werewolves, giant or misshapen animals/people, sociopathic miscreants, witches, and especially zombies. Give me sociopathic space aliens, maybe some goblins, but most especially, give me demonic, shape-shifting clowns.

Which brings us to IT. Steven King’s masterpiece novel scared the pants off me (literally); the 3+ hour 2-part TV mini-series made my pants fly onto me. I was so disappointed in the movie I swore on all that is holy that I would never, never, never watch it again for the rest of my natural life! But, I watched it again last night with my daughter… and it wasn’t bad. I must have built up so much vitriol from my original disappointment, that I remembered the movie as being worse than it was. Don’t get me wrong, the second half of the movie (the adult-centric half with the Muppet spider) was incredibly bad, but the first half was ok. The child actors were actually quite good, and Tim Curry was brilliant throughout (as good as his RHPS performance). I have nothing against TV sitcom actors; I like them quite well in TV sitcoms. They just have no business being in a horror movie. And, I really can’t blame the director for most of the movie’s travesties—he was crippled by a TV movie budget and apparently had good ideas for re-writes (including getting rid of the Muppet spider) and ideas for new scenes that could not be shot on budget.

I demand IT to be remade into a big-budget major motion picture by a masterful director with real chops for suspense and horror (any ideas?) and a great cast (any ideas?). I would love to see Curry reprise his Pennywise role (Jack Nicholson at his over-the-top Joker-esque best, would be my second choice). I’m still not sure if a 68 (or 77) year old Pennywise would work, but I think it would if they got a good stunt double for the acrobatics. Imagine how scary Curry could be without limitations of a TV PG rating. About the only thing he was able to do was bare his fangs a lot. The blood coming out of the photo album was even pushing the horror limit for 1990 TV.

About the only way I can get a good scare these days is to open my wedding album :eek: (sorry :o, bad divorce), so help me out and give me your answers. Good luck and Godspeed.

Oh, I just recalled one scary movie that did frighten me much more than The Exorcist. I must have suppressed memory of it because it’s actually too horrible (I literally died of a heart attack when I watched this as a child). I’m tempted not to post it, but, as long as you don’t have a bad heart, I think you can handle this small clip (click at your own risk): Zanti Misfits

2

My apologies to Stephen King, who, of course, spells his name Stephen, not Steven. (I don’t think even Steven Hawking would misspell King’s name like that, even though he has trouble writing anything).

But, while I have your attention: I just thought of who would be good to cast for the adult roles in the IT remake: the grown child actors from the original. Though one of them, tragically, committed suicide.

3

Well, Tibby, it looks like it’s just you and me in here (or not).

We’re due for a reboot of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. The premise is good and eerie. The 1978 version was good; the 1956 version was better; the 2015 version should be best.

Best scene from ’78 version: Woof

That scene gives me the creeps because it looks just like my schnoodle (my dog schnoodle, not my other…“schnoodle”.

4

I believe it’s also time to reboot a movie based on H.G. Well’s The Invisible Man, but relevant in the modern computer age. I have an idea for a treatment:

Plot Summary: A brilliant scientist, Dr. T.B. Eee, devises a way to alter his reflective properties and become permanently invisible, thus allowing him to visit female locker rooms completely unnoticed and immune to law enforcement detection. However, the handsome doctor is stunned to learn that his invisibility extends into his online world and that his typically pithy and thought provoking message board posts remain virtually undetected and ignored by the inhumane internet community, thus driving the good doctor murderously insane.

5

I lost all interest in any opinion of yours with the above sentence.

I mean , if you opined that a clear, sunny day in July was “Hot,” I’d check a thermometer just to make sure.

Aliens, on Rotten Tomatoes.

Aliens, on Metacritic.

Now I get that some people didn’t care for Aliens; it wasn’t their “thing.” Fine.

I also get that Alien3 and Alien: Resurrection had problems, real, structural problems, and are substantially lacking compared to Alien and Aliens.

But to categorically state that all Alien sequels “suck”…simply takes you out of any adult conversation.

Stick to Scooby Doo, lite beer, and chicken nuggets until you develop an adult’s palette.

6

I’d actually like to make a live-action Scooby Doo that is truly scary, and not cartoony. Still a comedy, but in a Cabin In The Woods or Evil Dead way, with some genuine creepy scares. Scooby would be a real dog, too, not CGI.

7

Do not, under any circumstances remake the Exorcist. No no, never. Movies that perfect do not need to be made again for a modern audience.

8

Aye, GuanoLad, me lad, a live-action Scooby Doo would indeed make a fine movie. In fact, even a cartoony Scooby Doo would be far better and scarier than Aliens.

Also of interest: Studies show a high degree of correlation between people who think Aliens is a great, suspenseful movie, and people who got their panties all bunched up and sobbed when Rambo, First Blood, Part ll did not win an Academy Award for Best Picture.

9

I’d definitely not want a remake of The Exorcist as there’s a 99,99999999% probability that it’ll be inferior to the original.

My first thought may actually stray a bit from the spirit of the OP: I’d love to see a rewriting of Phantoms, the Joe Chappelle film based on the Dean Koontz novel. The first half (roughly) was fascinating and scary. WTF was happening in that deserted town? Some great and weird ideas there. Once the answer was found, it turned into a regular evil monster (with some superpowers, granted). Huge disappointement.

A movie that could be vastly improved by modern FX would be The Langoliers. Again, the premise was good with a very unsettling series of events. Turns out there are some kind of monsters involved but I’ll give it some slack because the idea remained intriguing. But once they appeared… let’s be charitable and say that CGI was in its infancy and, even at the time, I thought they looked completely fake.

10

See, I just don’t understand that frame of mind, though many people share it. To me, if a movie is great, it’s nearly always based on a great story, and great stories should be repeated. There are only so many great stories to tell concerning the human condition, so don’t be stingy with them.

And, what harm comes from having more than one movie with the same plot? It’s not like you’re going to offend the original film. There is no biblical command; Thou shalt not have any motion pictures before me! At worst, the new movie is a clunker and it fades into obscurity (except with people who love Aliens). At best, you have a new movie that pays homage to the original and is itself a great watch—so, make extra popcorn and fire up the TV for a twin bill.

What really tans my hide is when a great story is turned into a clunker from the beginning (like with IT). Then I think; crap, why did those guys have to film this story?, now I’ll have to most likely wait years, or forever before anyone attempts to do it again, correctly.

Les Espaces Du Sommeil (dang, get a name with less letters, like Lester, will ya?:)), I agree The Langoliers would be a good move to remake with a major motion picture budget. Stephen King stories should not be made into TV mini-series, period.

11

That’s precisely what I came here to say.

I read the novel when I was 13 (too young). I’ve seen the movie many times over the years, introducing my kids to it. Perfection. Might as well remake/reboot Gone With The Wind.

12

I don’t especially want to see remakes. I would like to see a good gory all new horror film.

I don’t want torture porn like Hostel.

I don’t want a slasher. The FIRST Halloween or Friday the Thirteenth can be vaguely interesting but when film after film the evil is defeated… Only to return and therefore proven as unstoppable it gets pointless.

I don’t want idiot characters doing idiot things. Especially not 25 year old “teenagers” - Oh no! Our best friend has just been disembowelled. Let’s split away from the safety of our remaining friends and make love loudly until the killer finds us.

TCMF-2L

13

I’ll add to the pile on: a big fat NOPE to an Exorcist remake. Same with Poltergeist, but unfortunately that remake is already in the works.

Pet Sematary sure could use a remake though.

14

I’d love to see what JJ Abrams could do with a remake of all three Star Wars prequels.

No one likes them, so me thinks they’re prime candidates for a remake.

15

I’m pretty sure that my name isn’t the longest here :rolleyes:. But Lester’s fine :). Or LEDS as someone suggested a few months ago.

16

I am in the “Don’t remake great movies” camp, and as far as I know, this is utterly wrong. Great movies need to have a lot of things go right, and story is only one of them (and maybe the least important). A great movie needs a great director, a great vision of what the movie should be, the right script, the right cast, etc. A remake of *The Exorcist *is extremely likely to lack at least one of those; most likely that “vision” thing. We would end up with a soul-less picture designed by a committee.

Yeah, not so much. There are an infinite number of stories out there waiting to be told.

17

Presumably you missed the 1993and 2007remakes. While they both have their issues, Meg Tilly’s “Where you gonna go?” speech in the 1993 version is absolutely chilling.

18

I’d second remaking It, and a trilogy of The Stand directed by Guillermo del Toro because he has a good sense of what makes the human psyche twist up in knots and the book couldn’t be pared down into a single movie. Who would you cast as Flagg, though? He would have to be equal parts persuasive and terrifying.

How about a reboot of Hellraiser as well? The book kept me awake at night, the movie was meh.

19

I think folks just need to accept that many of King’s books just wind up looking silly on screen, and that is in large measure because, well, they are silly.

As for me, I would like to see Dracula done right. It never has been. Dracula’s shipboard journey could be downright chilling if filmed properly. Also, please don’t make Dracula some tragic romantic figure. He is a seducer, yes, but an evil seducer. That was kind of the point.

20

ExTank, this is out of line in Cafe Society. Keep the criticism about the topic, not about the poster.