The Real Issue With Remakes and Reboots

[Chancey289]

Now first off, I'm talking more so about the film industry than anything.

I'm not the type of person that's going to condemn a remake right off the back because the automatic hatred is f#cking hackneyed at this point. There's already been more than enough evidence to show it's not always bad thing.

John Carpenter's The Thing is a remake and one of my favorite horror flicks ever. The new Evil Dead just recently is everything Evil Dead should be without being just some carbon copy of the original and the original movies are some of my favorite movies of all time.

Even foreign remakes I'm open too as they can be interesting. The U.S. adaption of The Ring is better than it has any right to be and I'm saying that as a MASSIVE fan of Asian horror.

The real issue with remakes is THE NUMBER of them. When you look at the film industry nowadays, how many are not just sequels, remakes/reboots, or superhero movies? There you go.

There's also the issue of remaking things that shouldn't be remade or really doesn't need to. Remaking something can be an experiment to improve upon the original or take an older story and introduce it to a more contemporary lifestyle and that can be a very interesting concept. The world has changed and there's films from decades ago that would play out very differently. On paper it's a great idea.

But when you do it just because you don't have a creative brain cell in your head then that's when it's bad. Especially if you miss the point. Looking at you Robocop. Ugh, that remake is going to be just awful.

They're also gonna be rebooting Terminator because that makes total sense. Especially when you have a franchise that seriously has more than a enough room for a continuation.

Oh and don't get me started on The Naked Gun remake. Good luck trying to recapture the magic of Leslie Nielsen and that movie. HINT HINT: YOU F#CKING CAN'T! Just the fact that he use to be a more serious actor added to the comedic effect of that movie. The guy who was missing his tooth in The Hangover will never be able to be as good. It's something you shouldn't even try.

What are we going to do years from now looking back on the films we have made? You're basically gonna see 2 generations with 2 different versions of the same movie. Are we gonna remake remakes or will it force them to get creative?

Remaking a movie or rebooting a franchise can be all fine and dandy. Just don't let it be the only thing there. A movie like Pacific Rim which is a fun original idea shouldn't be so few and far between.

 

[Demi-fiend]

I wish I had something substantial to say... because this deserves discussion on a deeper level.

Ah well.

 

[V]

Actually I think the problem with Hollywood remakes now is that:

a) they are usually watered down. Think this Robocop will have the level of violence and satire that made the first one great? Nope. Probably won't even use it to the effect of making Robocop a properly tragic or trapped character, which has to be weighted by the graphic violence of his death. But let's not forget Robocop 2 kinda sucked back when they were making great movies like this, too. And the less said about 3 the better. It got exploitative, and dumb. Kinda like now.

b) they do it so they can appeal to the widest possible audience, lowest common denominator, for the biggest possible bucks. When you try to make a film for almost everyone, you make it bland, it lacks teeth.

 

[EllDawn]

One problem is they completely miss what the story is trying to say. I watched some episodes of 21 Jump St. when I was a kid. When I heard about the film remake, I got curious and watched the trailer. There was no way I was going to watch the movie after that. The show had been about making a difference and helping teens in finding who they are. The movie looked like it was about partying and getting into trouble just to give a few laughs and saying, "It's fun. That's all that matters."

I watched Evil Dead, being a fan of the original films, and loved it. It was more serious than the original and felt like it was actually leading somewhere. And it has been confirmed that it's not actually a remake. It's more of an alternate storyline that they're hoping to crossover into the original at some point.

With Phantom of the Opera (not the opera) there are many remakes. I haven't seen all of them, but I have seen a few. The silent film was something I used to fall asleep to as a kid. More recently I watched it again and did like it. Some time ago I saw what was supposed to be a remake and it really fell short.

As I said, they lose sight of what the story is actually trying to say and change it with what they think the current generation will want.

 

[Jak]

i feel as if a lot of remakes are just cash grabs. but there are some out there that do quite nice. i will still go on and say that the thing is a prequel to john carpenter's original (watch them back to back). but movies like, the day the earth stood still, is illustrating a more modern take on the same story, similar morals and so on and so forth. charlie and the chocolate factory is another, which i feel does a better job of showing us the life of a run away who never grew up and is really creepy. however, i can see the fact of why movie reboots and remakes are looked down upon because the studios look at trends. and now, the current trend is "dark and gritty" or "EXPLOSIONS" or "MORE BLOOD AND GUTS/CGI". and not to say anything against that, because korean jesus knows how much i love dark and gritty and **** blowing up in a grotesque...but that works with something like "foot loose" or oceans 11 (to a certain degree it was), or carrie, but not really with something like miracle on 31st street or a christmas story or something along those lines. because they are fine the way they are.

 

[mrrandomlulz]

Removed everything great about the original movie

The only remake I've ever seen that I liked was Scarface

 

[Rebel Dynasty]

Funny, this topic comes up fairly often with family and friends.

Chancey289: I can completely agree with you; I'm not against remakes, provided they do something new and innovative with it, while still showing respect in some way to the original. I also wholeheartedly agree that it feels like Hollywood is both running out of ideas, and making bids for fast cash while being far too lazy to think up anything fresh and interesting.

Good call on Total Recall, mrrandomlulz: It was one thing not to make it the exact same as the original (I won't lie; I have spent many a-time watching the original, rolling around on my couch in silent fits of laughter every time Arnold spoke) but to remove the core essence of what made it a good movie? That was stupid on their part.

 

[ef9dante_oSsshea]

gotta agree prime example for me was the remake of footloose, the poseidon adventure and others

 

[Jak]

It is.
It leads right into john carpenter's version.
Look at the link comparisons between the two.

Spoiler

​

The Thing 2011 is the events before john carpenter's The Thing

Also anyone who says The Thing 2011 isn't a remake is wrong too.
Because it's a remake of the original black & white version.
John carpenter's version was how it original was meant but the original black & white movie screwed it up SO The Thing 2011 re-did that prequel to fit john carpenter's

there's an original black and white? que?

 

[Jak]

In Campbell's original novella, the "Thing" is a life form capable of assuming the physical and mental characteristics of any living thing it encounters; this characteristic was later realized in John Carpenter's 1982 remake of the film
As i said John Carpenter's The Thing isn't a remake exactly because it takes place after the events of The Thing from Another World
That squire chuck of ice they find empty, it was from the 1951 version.
Where they find the dug up space ship was from the 1951 version.
Everything in John Carpenter's The Thing where they visit the other cold weather station THAT was from the 1951 version The Thing from Another World the black & white version.
The black & white version is the start of the TWO part story.

Spoiler

​

Spoiler

so...the prequel is a remake of the original 1951 version?

 

[Jak]

And see that's what happens when directors wanna add their own spin & tell stories their way instead of keeping true to the source material.
You get The Thing from Another World

This is why many people don't care for Reboots.

well technically thats more so an inaccurate adaptation than a remake or reboot. plus, a lot of adaptations did this and still to this day adapt a book inaccurately. i see you over there trying to use my words against me. dat **** ain't gon' work tho. lol

 

[Jak]

ok. how about i present you guys with a list of reboots that worked and are actually better than the original (movies, literature, and videogames)

movies
*the dark knight trilogy: holds up a helluva lot better than the 4 original films. i'm sorry but batman forever is the only one of the original 4 my friends and i can sit through without killing a puppy
*the amazing spider-man: creates more likable characters in two hours than an entire trilogy could muster (like seriously, peter and mj are just terrible and harry and JJ were the only people i actually cared for).
*dredd: dare i go on?
*the punisher: each one is a reboot of the previous, however, each one is better than the previous
*007 (dalton-craig): its not that everything before the dalton era was bad. its just that even though the movies were (very) loosely following the canon of the books and short stories, they weren't as enjoyable. where as from the dalton and on era, they went back to that tone of a war torn world and a spy bearing a lot of emotional luggage but doing his best to drown it out with more alcohol the human body should be able to handle
*superman: say what you want, but superman just turned to **** after donner was replaced. and man of steel, does what it can to try and please all superman fanbases

examples of movies that don't suck

 

[Jak]

We're waiting to see what happens NEXT!

but sometimes nothing happens next. what if after superman II (because thats where it ends) nothign happened? or after the events of batman forever, nothing happened? or at the end of star wars episode VI all goes well in the galaxy. sometimes there is no more story left to tell. and sometimes its better to have something die than to have it go on and turn to crap. and trust me, there are a **** ton of things that can be rebooted, but they haven't been. there are only a fist full of movies and books and videogames etc than have been rebooted. now the thing about that fistful is that they've been rebooted so many times, that it seems like EVERYTHING is being rebooted. but thats not the case.

 

[Rebel Dynasty]

You both have valid points, Jak and VampireWicked. I think you did make an epic "Reese penut buttercup" there. XD

Sometimes reboots and remakes are a good thing; if done properly, they bring an older story into the present, and bring in a younger, newer audience while also renewing interest in the older audience.

I will admit that a lot of the time, it doesn't work out that way, but occasionally you get a diamond out of all those lumps of coal.

Then again, what's a diamond and what's coal is entirely up to the individual.

 

[Rebel Dynasty]

Oh absolutely.
I agree they can be a good thing & at times necessary.
Case in point The Thing from Another World: 1951 TheThing2011 was necessary remake of it to actually correct CORRECT the mistakes of the original director who thought it was a good idea & NOT follow the source material.

Agreed, To a certain point.
If IF the original movie has done well & is fondly remembered THEN there is no need to reboot it.
Doing so to an original movie that is not forgotten & still loved even by today's generation is nothing more then lack of creativity.................

Agreed. I was never huge on Dirty Dancing (it's just not my usual type of movie) but I recognized it as being one of the better movies out there. When they remade it, they pretty much slapped every fan of the original movie in the face.

 

[Jak]

Then leave it alone, let it end.

That is the best thing you've said.
And lets combine what i've said & what you just said...............

It's more so of even though you can, doesn't always mean you should. and sometimes its better to have something die than to have it go on and turn to crap.

OMG Is that the ingredients to Reese's Peanut Butter cups.......I think so lol.

know what...i'll go with it. besides, reese's peanut butter cups are delicious
*takes bite and forgets he's allergic to peanuts*
oh ****
*dies*

 

[Jak]

.....................& the director cashing in of the still continued fame of the original.
IF a director can't continue the original story by making a prequel or sequel THEN that is lacking in creativity.

The Terminator getting rebooted.
Necessary ?
NO.
Because it hasn't been forgotten, still loved & recognised by today's audience.

I ask are people justifying a reboot of highly recognised & loved original even by today's audience because it's necessary or because they're getting a new movie?

i agree with you on the fact that it shouldn't be rebooted, but not for the same reasons.

 

[Chancey289]

Ok whatever. I know that John Carpenter's The Thing is the second adaption of the novella "Who Goes There" but, it's still just pretty much universally considered a remake and do what every other fan does and pretend the sh!tty 2011 one doesn't exist.

John Carpenter's The Thing is still one of the greats in horror movies. A real classic.

 

[Jak]

Ice cream & cake then lol.

doesn't work like that. i already died. no take backs

 

[Rolanthas]

The Thing remake was exceptionally tragic in that, the director actually used animatronics and practical effects for the monsters, then the studio disregarded all those and just composited 3D models on top of the existing puppets anyway.

Aaaand of course they look downright awful.