It feels like we’re always complaining about how many remakes (and reimaginings, and reduxes, and sequels, and franchises, and whatever other fancy word you can dream up for non-original ideas) are coming out of Hollywood. But now there really, really, truly seems to be more than ever before coming down the line: After this summer of Star Trek and Terminator and Land of the Lost, we still have Footloose, Harvey, The Yellow Submarine, Karate Kid, Fame, The A-Team, Predator, Children of the Corn, and, well, a heck of a lot of others to look forward to. But is this an unequivocally bad and/or stupid move on the entertainment industry’s part? This L.A. Times post makes some reasoned arguments that it’s not: Basically, a familiar title is a better bet, especially in bad economic times — not just because it ensures a certain return on investment (I must admit I’m genetically programmed to show up at anything called Footloose, and I’m a trained professional who should know better), but because people also gravitate toward the soothing familiar than the unknown (whether they’ll still have a job next month is enough of an unknown, thank you very much).
I’d also agree that, while there’s nothing like the thrill of watching an entirely fresh idea unfold (like in this summer’s Up), remakes aren’t all bad. Star Trek was fun, no? And a remake doesn’t necessarily amount to a copy of an original; a wily filmmaker could have a fresh story in mind that simply works as a “reimagining” of a previous work, with some serious liberties taken. Voila: Art and commerce meet. The Times cites His Girl Friday. I’d even cite Land of the Lost — not as great art, but as an example of how much leeway you can take while still calling something a remake. If it had been, you know, good, that would’ve been even better. If sequels/reimaginings/remakes are bad, it’s because the creative forces behind them are simply lazy or misguided. Terminator: Salvation didn’t suck because it’s a Terminator movie; it sucked because the storytelling was messy and aimless.
What do you think, PopWatchers? Are remakes an unequivocally bad trend? And true confessions time: Which of the plethora of upcoming reboots actually have you a little excited?
Photo Credit: Pine: Zade Rosenthal; Bacon: Everett Collection
Still waiting for the Showgirls remake! Oh wait, didn’t that stink the first time?
Dudes(and Dudettes), they are making a remake of ‘Drop Dead Fred’. Enough said
The Sound of Music….Starring Hilary Duff……ya, they are a bad idea.
Remakes of iconic movies and tv shows are horrible. There is a reason those movies and tv show are iconic and you can’t remake that. Remaking The Last Dragon, horrible idea. Remaking Footloose, horrible idea. Remaking The A-Team, I won’t even go there. In the 80′s you can make a movie or tv show that although it seems silly or stupid and would never happen, it still made since. The A-Team could not be remade. How would they explain the Army never being able to get the A-Team yet ordinary citzen, sometimes who had no phone, could contact them for help. Footloose. Would there really be a town in the US that bans music? Leave the remakes alone.
Sina, I agree. You really cannot remake the 80s into a successful movie (hell, sometimes you can’t go back and watch the original show successfully). I cried foul the loudest when I heard about A-Team and Footloose. It just can’t work, unless it is a purposeful parody. And that won’t work because too much time has elapsed.
It all depends on execution. “The Odyssey” inspired “Ulysses” and “Cold Mountain” as well as “O Brother, Where Art Thou”. “The Front Page” was remade as the utterly brilliant “His Girl Friday”. Even the update on “The Tomas Crown Affair” brought a new sensibility (and sensuality) to the story).
On the other hand, there are too many atrocious remakes to even mention.
Yeah, but those are all remakes that came before this “current” trend where really nothing has been better than the original for the past few years
I agree that I can’t think of a recent remake that’s been worth two cents (redoing “Rear Window” as a teen thriller was a terrible idea), but I won’t throw the idea into the garbage can. After all, even “The Brady Bunch” inspired a couple of very funny movies (I love you, Gary Cole!). What’s so sacrosanct about “The A-Team”?
well besides the Parent Trap and Freaky Friday…all remakes I have seen the original is always better!
I guess it’s all subjective, because my family preferred the original Parent Trap, too…
Hollywood doesn’t have a fresh idea to save their lives. I mean c’mon: a movie version of the toy Viewmaster? Remakes of already shi**y movies like SORORITY ROW and PROM NIGHT? Do we REALLY need another HALLOWEEN, NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, or FRIDAY THE 13th??? No!!! What moviegoers need is something different, not the latest FINAL DESTINATION trashfest. DISTRICT 9 is a good example of how a small budget, truly talented individuals and a clever and creative premise can sell tickets. Unfortunately not as many as TRANSFORMERS, but still…
Excellent examples, but it doesn’t matter that District 9 didn’t sell as many tickets look at the profits that your two examples made:
District 9 was made for about $30 million, and in the US alone it has grossed $90 million (imdb.com) that’s a profit of $60 million and a 200% return on investment.
Transformers 2 took roughly $200 million to produce and made roughly $400 million in the US (imdb.com). Sure it made $200 million in profit but it was only a 100% return on investment.
So dollar for dollar District 9 was actually a better investment than Transformers 2 (not including other merchandising).
The problem is that studios seem to think that a movie has to make a hundred million dollars to be considered successful, and for a movie to make that much they have to put a lot of money behind it so they get gun shy and take the safe road of a tried and true story. What studios need to remember is that you can make a movie for a couple of million dollars and turn around and get 30 million at the box office. Sure the number isn’t as impressive as 200 million but the profit margin is much larger. The studios need to take risks on titles and maybe lower their expectations at the box office. Stop trying to stack a movie with big name actors that cost an arm and a leg and instead throw in a relatively unknown actor and spend the money on creating a good story. And for crying out loud if you’re going to do a re-make use a property that is at least 40-50 years old not something from 15-20 years ago that people still remember because then people are always going to compare the remake to the original that they saw when they were kids.
maybe the best attitude to have is to think of remakes like cover songs. Hopefully it doesn’t change how you feel about the original. Just a new version
i have seen very few remakes that are better than the original. instead of wasting money on something we’ve already seen i would rather see something new. it seems to me hollywood doesn’t want to gamble on a movie, they just want to give us the same things over and over, to me that is not entertainment. i refuse to even spend money on something i have already seen once 10-20 years ago.
I don’t know that the are unequivocally bad, but if a movie was good the first time around, why “re-imagine” it. Some movies are more amenable to a re-make (my Trekkie friends really liked the new Star Trek), but by and large, I think it has more to do with a lack of imagination in Hollywood, and concern over box office. If the original made bank, why not just re-do it, and make bank again? Then we don’t have to come up with an original and potentially risky idea. The problem is that people get attached to the original versions and don’t want to see a remade version. I loved the original Footloose, and therefore I am less likely to see the remake. If you want to introduce a new generation to “classic” movies, or even tv shows, just show them the original, instead of a remake with a teeny bopper from some WB tv show. I don’t want a new generation thinking that the movie sucks when it didn’t originally. As for the ones that sucked originally (Drop Dead Fred), I am at a total loss for why studio would throw good money after bad. Go back to the drawing board, Hollywood, and give us some more original works. Leave 80s movies and tv alone!
This is kind of a slippery slope. Next thing you know, E.T., Titanic, and Home Alone will be coming out all the heck over again. I think they should stop before it gets more than just mildly annoying.
The story of the Titanic has been told many times in the movies.
For every remake that’s actually successful (and Star Trek wasn’t so much a remake as a re-imagining) we are saddled with a Psycho (Fail) Halloween, Halloween 2, or Friday the 13th (FAIL x3), and the upcoming Fame, Footloose, and Rocky Horror Picture Show. Although to be frank that has promise but only if they get Mika to play Franknfurter, Zac Effron to play Brad, and Vanessa (do you know who I am?!) Hudgeons to play Slut..er Janet.
Not a big fan of remakes. I quite hate this horrible trend. Yes, Star Trek was good. But that’s one movie in an ocean of reboots/remakes that have all sucked. And my god, the horror genre has got to be the WORST offender of them all!
Now, I can understand the excitement in re-imagining something, and I certainly understand the appeal of a built-in audience from a business standpoint. But in that case, why not keep adapting novels, comics etc? Why remake movies that have already made their mark? That “familiar for an audience during these harsh times” excuse is a bs cop out. It’s more comfortable for the studios, who are unwilling to take chances. Case in point, if a new fresh movie does make a splash, the first thing they do is plunder it by making a sequel (essentially the cousin to a remake). Like The Depression, the movies serves as escapism, so I would argue the audiences will show up regardless, remake or not. Just so long as a movie looks GOOD.
I think some remakes are ok, but the problem is that they have taken over and the remakes far outnumber the original ideas. Also some remakes are just asking to be horrible aka remaking Buffy the Vampire Slayer without Joss, SMG or any of the tv show cast/crew
To me the problem is not much “is a remake good or bad?” (and frankly, Rob Zombie’s Halloween was terrible!! I don’t need nor I want to know what went wrong in Michael’s family. Why? So I can say, “Oh, he was bullied – they I’ll understand why he became a serial killer. I’m siding with him, now.” No!! It’s scarier when you don’t know) The problem is, “Am I to believe that Hollywood has run out of ideas? That there’s nothing fresh under the sun?” As you mentioned, “Up” is awesome. “Drag me to hell” is a solid old-style horror. “The Hangover” took everyone by surprise. And so on and so forth. I don’t want to see another Predator. I want to see a new monster, or a new romantic comedy (the title would fit for both, by the way). Stop tarnishing good memories – do your own movie. You know it’s possible. People have been doing it for decades. Why stop now?