Re-makes that are better than the originals

[Artaxerxes]

The original is a bag of wank that thinks its cleverer than it is, its not.

 

[DJ Squelch]

Heat was better than LA Takedown but the original was only a TV movie so not sure it counts.
Wizard Of Oz
Scarface

 

[May Kasahara]

bollocks

yes

The original is a masterpiece, the remake is a hollywood crapathon.

yes

The original is a bag of wank that thinks its cleverer than it is, its not.

no

 

[internetstalker]

King Kong (the second one not the 3rd)

 

[DotCommunist]

War of the Worlds

*flees*

 

[The Octagon]

absolutely no way

the japanese one has tension and is scary, the US one is just lame

and the fact that you already know what's gonna happen cos it's the same film ruins it

Ok, now imagine you saw them the other way round.

Wouldn't the Japanese version be 'ruined' by the fact you know what's going to happen?

The US Version is better made, better acted and still scary (Samara coming out of the TV is fucking chilling no matter how many times you watch it).

Likewise The Departed, it's just a better made film whilst still retaining the same raw edge of the original. The actors are better (surely no argument here?) and I just prefer it.

Compare the set pieces in Infernal to Departed and they can't match up.

IMO, of course.

Counter-arguments?

 

[cybertect]

King Kong (the second one not the 3rd)

Er, no it's not (better than the original).

 

[gsv]

By definition, the remake of Dawn of the Dead could never beat the original in terms of innovation and iconic-ness. But for all that, and for all that we love it, the original isn't a very good film. After all, one of the things we love it for is that it's a bit clunky.

The re-make has better characters, better scares and substantially better production values.

GS(v)

 

[Griff]

Dawn of the Dead

No way.

 

[Orang Utan]

I think The Departed is a boring mess

 

[Artaxerxes]

By definition, the remake of Dawn of the Dead could never beat the original in terms of innovation and iconic-ness. But for all that, and for all that we love it, the original isn't a very good film. After all, one of the things we love it for is that it's a bit clunky.

The re-make has better characters, better scares and substantially better production values.

GS(v)

Exactly

 

[internetstalker]

Er, no it's not (better than the original).

Blatently is

the colour version with Jeff Bridges is better then the OG Black & White version

 

[Pie 1]

Likewise The Departed, it's just a better made film whilst still retaining the same raw edge of the original. The actors are better (surely no argument here?) and I just prefer it.

Compare the set pieces in Infernal to Departed and they can't match up.

Totally agree.

I watched Infernal after Departed and quite franky, if I hadn't known the plot I would have been lost after about half an hour.
Plus, Infernal is 1h:35 & Departed is 2h:30 - that's a lot of extra milage to expand the plot, which makes it a much more coherent film at the end of the day.

 

[Stoat Boy]

War of the Worlds

*flees*

I tend to agree with you. I think its a much better film than its given credit for. Remove Tom Cruise from the leading role and replace with a proper character actor and I think you have a potential classic.

 

[albionism]

The Wicker Man

*legs it*

 

[isitme]

Ok, now imagine you saw them the other way round.

Wouldn't the Japanese version be 'ruined' by the fact you know what's going to happen?

The US Version is better made, better acted and still scary (Samara coming out of the TV is fucking chilling no matter how many times you watch it).

Likewise The Departed, it's just a better made film whilst still retaining the same raw edge of the original. The actors are better (surely no argument here?) and I just prefer it.

Compare the set pieces in Infernal to Departed and they can't match up.

IMO, of course.

Counter-arguments?

well the US one just did nothing for me, it didn't have any of the tension the original had, it just felt like yet another by the numbers american horror film

i've only seen the american one once, and that was years ago, but it just didn't leave any impression on me at all, except puzzlement as to why they had made a crap version of a recent film

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Ok, now imagine you saw them the other way round.

Wouldn't the Japanese version be 'ruined' by the fact you know what's going to happen?

The US Version is better made, better acted and still scary (Samara coming out of the TV is fucking chilling no matter how many times you watch it).

no i rewatch ring on occasion and it gets better each time... it's all about kinda knowing what is going to happen the futile struggle against the curse the deep deep bitterness

plus sadako is lovable in a very strange way

 

[May Kasahara]

By definition, the remake of Dawn of the Dead could never beat the original in terms of innovation and iconic-ness. But for all that, and for all that we love it, the original isn't a very good film. After all, one of the things we love it for is that it's a bit clunky.

The re-make has better characters, better scares and substantially better production values.

GS(v)

speak for yourself! i thought the scares were lame, and i'm wetter than a haddock's overcoat.

the original isn't really scary but i don't think it's meant to be, not in the traditional horror sense anyway. it's too tongue in cheek for that.

 

[isitme]

the original dawn of the dead is a lot more scary in a 'deeper' way. like it's about society falling apart and how close society already is to disintegration. it's also a pretty good attempt at the desolation of the end of the world. plus some nice anti consumerist messages nicely thrown in

the new one is cool, lots of scary bits, but it doesn't really match up to the original in terms of staying with you after it's finished imo

and that new one george romero did with the zombie struggle for liberation was fucking pathetic

 

[Nanker Phelge]

The re-make's a lousy film. If it's really better, the original must be truly gobshite

GS(v)

I never said the remake was good

 

[TheDave]

By definition, the remake of Dawn of the Dead could never beat the original in terms of innovation and iconic-ness. But for all that, and for all that we love it, the original isn't a very good film. After all, one of the things we love it for is that it's a bit clunky.

The re-make has better characters, better scares and substantially better production values.

GS(v)

Just because it had more polish and better paid actors does not make it a better film. It may be a good film in and of itself but compared to the original it has no depth to it and it's just plain bland to be honest.

 

[electrogirl]

The Beat that My Heart Skipped?

I've not seen the original but I've hear it's not as good.

 

[Pseudopsycho]

Has anyone seen the remake of day of the dead yet?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

The Thing.

Heh my choice also although to be fair its not hard given the original was a duff sci fi film made before decent effects!

 

[Orang Utan]

The original isn't duff - it's a classic red paranoia sci-fi film.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

The original isn't duff - it's a classic red paranoia sci-fi film.

Nah its crap.

 

[Orang Utan]

Ignorant fool

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Ignorant fool

Lol! Are you being ironic?

 

[Orang Utan]

No, you must be if you think The Thing is crap. It's very different from the remake but it's a great film.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

No, you must be if you think The Thing is crap. It's very different from the remake but it's a great film.

It's called a difference of opinion dickhead. Nothing great about the original, the remake is superb!