|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
03-15-2005, 11:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remakes of the Classics
so whats everyone's opinion on all the recent remakes (and up and coming ones) like dawn of the dead etc? should they have left alone or does it prove there's still a demand?
|
|
#2
03-15-2005, 01:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
some are ok and some can suck my dick.
i think they should bring something new to the picture. i liked the new dawn of the dead. it was cool. sure it wasnt that original, but it was a much needed improvement.now dont get me wrong the original was great, it just needed a face lift and a little modernization. the new TCM was cool as well. r. lee was great. i wish it had more of the atmosphere of the original. for example in the original the family was a bunch of canables. this time leather face just killed, skined, and wore. the movie was good but it could have been beter
__________________
you lied to me.
|
|
#3
03-17-2005, 06:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
day of the dead
you're totally right, dawn of the dead was a good remake. it didnt try to be something it wasnt, i wanna see day of the dead done next.
|
|
#4
03-17-2005, 07:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
People obviously have very strong opinions on this, considering we have had at least one fo these threads a week for months now. (Congrats, btw, you actually got it in the right forum)
Remakes are occasionally well dont (DOTD is a good excample),but for the most part, they seem to show that filmmakers are lazy and dont seem to want to put any real effort into creating something new. It also shows that the typical movie going audience is easily pleased and paying out money to see them. The law of supply and demand seems to be showing that they are profitable. Unfortunately, the good ones are probably responsible fo rthe existance of the shitty ones. if they hadnt made money, the studious wouldnt have bothered to make the shitty ones.
__________________
Some misguided people decided I was funny enough to pay. See if they're right: http://www.cracked.com/members/Vodstok/ (I tweet pretty hardcore, too)
|
|
#5
03-17-2005, 07:35 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
1. how can a remake be original? 2. are you saying that it was an improvement on the original Dawn of the Dead?
__________________
Whatever The Fuck Ever
|
|
#6
03-17-2005, 02:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
original as in keeping to the original, yet still adding something new. in DOD it was basicly the same movie but it brought something new to the pic. in the original it started with everything already over run with zombies. in the remake the zombie phenomen had just started. it also went more in depth with the characters past. it also had a more diverse character base.
as for an improvement on the original im ment some parts were better and some werent. for example the character development and the gore was more realistic. also the character mixture was more likley. so the remake was realer than the original. so in some ways it was an improvement. in truth i like the remake better, but dont get me i still love and admire the original. they will both go down in cinematic history. the original for macking consumerism and all the reasons it is popular now, and the remake for being a great movie and probibly the best remake of a classic horror film.
__________________
you lied to me.
|
|
#7
03-18-2005, 04:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Leave them alone, remakes are usually all about the money, there are exceptions though, The Thing and The Fly were taken into full effort!
__________________
 Favorite Band: Black Sabbath Second Fav Band: Pink Floyd Favorite Non Horror Movie: Papillon 5 Fav Horror Authors: Stephen King, Anne Rice, Edgar Allan Poe, H. P. Lovecraft, and Mary Shelley.
|
|
#8
03-18-2005, 04:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Dawn of the Dead succeeded for the same reason The Thing and the Fly succeeded, they ended up in the hads of someone with some actual talent, and was passionate about the subject matter and cared enough about it to make it a good movie.
Have you ever seen the original Thing? It was ungodly boring. "Vegetable based man-creature runs amok on antarctic base. someone got bludgeoned." I have actually yet to see all of the carpenter remake, but from what i have seen, it was pure genius. I will reserve full judgement until i have seen the whole Thing. (Get it?)
__________________
Some misguided people decided I was funny enough to pay. See if they're right: http://www.cracked.com/members/Vodstok/ (I tweet pretty hardcore, too)
|
|
#9
03-18-2005, 06:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
its like i said in either this thread or one of the other 12 'remakes' bitching threads ...
movies have been remade over and over again for years .. foreign films have been adapted to american films for years now. new films for new generations. people are just noticing it here and now because people are more 'aware' these days via the internet ..etc .. some are good, some are bad ..lah di dah, life goes on, there will be a tomorrow.
|
|
#10
03-18-2005, 06:21 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Wickerman will join forces with Darth Bane and they will use their combined powers of typing in caps and creating poorly worded Hellraiser lines to defeat us all! AHHHHH!!!!!
__________________
Some misguided people decided I was funny enough to pay. See if they're right: http://www.cracked.com/members/Vodstok/ (I tweet pretty hardcore, too)
|
 |
|
|
