Like you say, it's all about the money. Studios don't care how much the older generation liked or revered an original classic movie. They want to tap into the current generation's money spending potential and will prostitute any old movie to achieve that. Just in case you haven't noticed, nothing is sacred in this world.

 

Even the black and white originals can be made into color and would be better than a remake in just about all cases.

 

Quite a few of the Christmas classics have been remade. We usually have a marathon and watch a bunch of the originals every year. I've seen the colorized version of the 1947 Miracle on 34th street, but prefer the black and white original.

 

I am beginning to loathe the constant remakes of great films into mediocre kung-fu action computer-generated background gack.

 

I actually have a VCR and a tube TV in my livingroom so I can watch movies in their original format. I bought Lynyrd Skynyrd "Freebird the Movie" on DVD and it didnt look right. So I bought a VCR and the VHS version.

Nothing better than Castlevania on NES.

 

I actually have a VCR and a tube TV in my livingroom so I can watch movies in their original format. I bought Lynyrd Skynyrd "Freebird the Movie" on DVD and it didnt look right. So I bought a VCR and the VHS version.

Nothing better than Castlevania on NES.



View attachment 955356

Ah! But it's widely known that playing CastleVania will attract wasps and hornets.

 

Yep...I refuse to watch remakes! It is like there are no more talented writers or producers. A remake of Road House??? Like who will do better then Swaze and Sam Elliot?

 

There is a serious lack of talented writers now days. on top of the lack of talent, the studios have to be very careful not to offend someone's feelings. Blazing Saddles, Some like it Hot, Archie Bunker, etc. could not be produced now. 😩
Andrew

 

Especially Blazing Saddles. We'll NEVER see another movie like that in our lifetimes, that's for sure. If they try to remake that one they could rename it "Blazing Liberalism."

 

Imagine how the snowflake writers would restript Blazing Saddles. The newly appointed white sheriff is riding into town and the local crack head stands on the roof screaming the sheriff is a cracker! 🤨
Andrew

 

I second all comments above. Creativity in Hollywood seems to be an oxymoron. Part of me gets it, that perpetual creativity is difficult and most of the best ideas were taken up in the first decades of film. But then I think about ongoing creativity in technology and the rationalization evaporates pretty quickly. I tried to watch the latest Mission Impossible (Dead Reckoning) and the storyline was pitiful. The writers were so lame that they resorted to naming the villian "The Entity." I could barely get through it, kept looking at the time counter, fast forwarding through garbage parts. It relied almost entirely on special effects, explosions, car chase, etc., as if that was a valid substitute for quality writing. Just junk.

 

First I will most likely never go to the movies again, that said I remember very well when I first saw Blazing Saddles. Middletown ny the Paramount theater. 1974

 

While I agree that remakes have a reasonable chance of failure, when compared to the originals, I try not to pass judgement until I see for myself. There are several examples that come to mind, in terms of movies, to where I enjoyed both the original and the remake. In some cases, it was helpful to view them as separate entities, but there was entertainment value to be had in both.

Some westerns: True Grit, 3:10 to Yuma, and The Magnificent Seven.

SCIFI: The Thing, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Star Trek II / Into Darkness (the same character arc presented differently), and The Omega Man/I Am Legend.

Also many of the classic monster/horror films, from their black and white originals to sometimes mulitiple renditions that have been well done.

These are just some that came to mind for me to where I enjoyed both the original and the remake. YMMV

 

While I agree that remakes have a reasonable chance of failure, when compared to the originals, I try not to pass judgement until I see for myself. There are several examples that come to mind, in terms of movies, to where I enjoyed both the original and the remake. In some cases, it was helpful to view them as separate entities, but there was entertainment value to be had in both.

Some westerns: True Grit, 3:10 to Yuma, and The Magnificent Seven.

SCIFI: The Thing, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Star Trek II / Into Darkness (the same character arc presented differently), and The Omega Man/I Am Legend.

Also many of the classic monster/horror films, from their black and white originals to sometimes multiple renditions that have been well done.

These are just some that came to mind for me to where I enjoyed both the original and the remake. YMMV

I am similar. I have no issue with remakes IF I liked the original AND it has good actors. For instance, ALL of the various versions of Dune have positives for a Dune fan.

I liked ALL versions of True Grit. I like both versions a The Thing. For The Day the Earth Stood Still, there is only the original, as it is one of the finest Sci-Fi movies if not the GOAT.

I can not imagine a remake of The Godfather. Nor could I imagine a remake of Casablanca or the Longest Day or a (HORRORS) colorized version.

About the tech though, I adopt new tech (but am NOT an early adopter - let others . To be limited to a CRT lo-def TV would force me to not watch. I do not want to ever return to the baseball and football games of my youth where I could not even see the ball, or the fuzz of VHS. My wife and I have already decided that with price drops, out next TV will be 85" for the price we paid for our first HD 60". With the surround sound systems, watching a Blu-ray of Master and Commander - Far Side of the World with Russell Crowe was unbelievable. During the scenes in the captain's cabin, the creaking of the old sailing ship and the wave sounds made you feel like you were in a sailing ship. Add in the sub-woofer and the cannon fire had a gut punch. It is like when a movie you have only seen on TV, gets a limited theatrical re-release and you can feel what it was originally like in the theater.

 

I'll be the odd person out here, I like the new version of True Grit more than the original. It was done in a different enough manner for me to find it pleasing, even surpassing aspects of the original.

The trouble with most remakes is they get too involved with special effects or, like many new releases the past few decades, try to make a political statement from it. Special effects are great in action flicks but leave a lot to be desired in the remake of an oldie but goodie. And political statements don't belong in a movie unless people get forewarned before hand.

JMHO, that and $2 will get you a cup of joe.

 

I'll be the odd person out here, I like the new version of True Grit more than the original. It was done in a different enough manner for me to find it pleasing, even surpassing aspects of the original.

The trouble with most remakes is they get too involved with special effects or, like many new releases the past few decades, try to make a political statement from it. Special effects are great in action flicks but leave a lot to be desired in the remake of an oldie but goodie. And political statements don't belong in a movie unless people get forewarned before hand.

JMHO, that and $2 will get you a cup of joe.

I agree with you on True Grit. It is a well done remake. To be sure, Jeff Bridges ain't no John Wayne. But he is a more versatile actor. That particular movie had to be a bit different. You cannot fill The Dukes shoes.

Well, except we need 1 more remake of Beau Geste. 🙄

Not correct. Gene Wilder and Marty Feldman did " the Last Remake of Beau Geste"

 

Goodbye Mr Chips with Martin Clunes.
Brilliant remake and even better than the original 1939 film. Didn't think I'd like it but he was able to take on the part and make it his own.

 

Reason for the remake is to put in the "WOKE" features into thee movies! That way they can install drag queens, two guys holding hands at a table, the sickness itself has me seeing red!

 

@tominct ... I am with you. I consider both to be excellent films. The first mostly because it was the Duke. But the newer one was better in pretty much every way. Bridges played the character better, Damon was a better LaBeouf, and Steinfeld deserved an Oscar for her Mattie, IMHO. Of course, my opinion of Darby as Mattie is I wish the snake would have taken her out, and preferably much, much earlier in the filming. Duvall and Pepper both played Ned Pepper extremely well.

 

Hollywood is stagnant, and they seem to often remake great movies only to have the remakes fail miserably when compared to the originals. On rare occasion the remakes are as good, or close, but not very often.
I loved "The Getaway" with Steve McQueen and Ali McGraw, and as much as I dislike Alec Baldwin the remake with him and Kim Bassinger was actually pretty good. That's a rare exception though.
I really disliked Jeff Bridges as Rooster Cogburn in True Grit remake, but the young girl was better than Kim Darby in the 1969 John Wayne version.

 

@Bill in VA ... To clarify: I did enjoy the new version of The Day the Earth Stood Still. On it's own, I found it to be an entertaining and pretty well made movie. That said I absolutely agree with your assessment of the original version. Michael Rennie was spectacular.

 

Well, except we need 1 more remake of Beau Geste. 🙄

 

Yes indeed, but only if it stars Gary Cooper.

 

ALL REMAKES I'VE SEEN STINK ~ PERIOD . HOLLYWOOD DON'T HAVE THE TALENT OR AMBITION TO MAKE A GOOD MOVIE ANYMORE ,SO THE TRY TO RIDE ON THE OLD CULT FOLLOWINGS OF THE CLASSICS