The new Russell Brand-fronted Arthur is, in my humble opinion, a mediocre update of a wonderfully funny time capsule of ’80s hedonism starring Dudley Moore. I can’t say I was all that into it. (Nor was EW critic Owen Gleiberman.) There are plenty of things wrong with the movie (like the ghastly lack of chemistry between Brand and his love interest Greta Gerwig) and I don’t think I’ll be encouraging any friends to rush out and spend their hard-earned money on it. But does it rank among the worst remakes of all time? This was the question I asked myself as I watched a graffiti-covered billboard for it whiz by me on my subway ride home Friday night. (Some expressive New Yorker with a Sharpie thinks Mr. Katy Perry is a “TOOL.”)
My answer? No, Arthur does not rank among the worst. Not when there are true cinematic atrocities like Gus Van Sant’s Psycho, Frank Oz’s The Stepford Wives, and Guy Ritchie’s Swept Away — all of which make Arthur look like a the comedic equivalent of a perfectly landed triple-axel-salchow-quadruple-lutz-quintuplet-backflip-while-simultaneously-performing-the-Moonwalk. There’s also Planet of the Apes (I love you, Tim Burton, but no), The Truth About Charlie (Marky Mark, you are no Cary Grant), and what could be the single worst remake of the last decade, Diane English’s pseudo-female empowerment gagathon, The Women (starring Meg Ryan). And let’s not forget the many fine foreign movies that Hollywood excels at bastardizing. (Do not) see: City of Angels and, as my colleague Karen Valby reminded me, The Last Kiss.
We all know why remakes irk. They take a beloved original piece of filmmaking and attempt to recreate its brilliance while simultaneously updating or rebooting or screwing it up in every imaginable way for today’s audiences. Harumph. (In an effort to counterbalance the griping nature of this post, I shall now take a moment to praise the rare remake that was actually excellent: The Departed. My favorite movie of 2006.)
Back to complaining.
Other appalling redos that have offended the cinephilic sensibilities of EW staffers? Behold:
From the desk of Keith Staskiewicz:
Breathless: Yeah, because what made Jean-Luc Godard’s movie so revolutionary was the plot. Just stick Richard Gere in there, how could you go wrong?
Bad News Bears: How is it possible that 30 years later, this version is far tamer and lamer than the original? In the words of Tanner Boyle, “Hey Linklater, you can take your remake and your PG-13 rating and shove ‘em straight up your a–!” (Also, whereas Walter Matthau was gruff but lovable, Billy Bob Thornton was intolerable.)
The Day the Earth Stood Still: Klaatu barada whoa.
From the desk of Darren Franich:
You’ve Got Mail: Oh god, I already didn’t really like You’ve Got Mail, but I recently saw The Shop Around the Corner and then I realized that I utterly DESPISE You’ve Got Mail. The original movie is so funny, so smart, so romantic, and just so fast. It’s also, weirdly, very dark — there are subplots about marital indiscretion and an attempted suicide. Conversely, You’ve Got Mail is one of those modern rom-coms that floats along on a cuteness bubble for two hours. Even when Meg Ryan loses her bookstore, it’s not really that sad, because the rich d-bag played by Tom Hanks is waiting to sweep her off her feet. Here’s the real test, I think: The Shop Around the Corner hasn’t aged a day, and You’ve Got Mail already feels incredibly ancient.
How’s that for some strong opinions? I’m sure you’ve got a few of your own, so let loose in the comments below and tell me: What are your choices for the worst remakes of all time?
Read more:
EW’s ‘Arthur’ review
21 Movie Remakes
my nominees for the worst remakes would be Wolfgang Peterson’s “Posiedon” truly dreadful, the live action remake of disney’s “101 Dalmatians” popular but awful, and worst of all that turd of a remake “The Fog” I saw it for free and still wanted my money back!
I’ve been trying to repress the memories of “Poseidon”. My second nomination is “Rollerball”. James Caan should go kick John McTiernan’s butt for making that turd!
Point Of No Return, with Bridget Fonda… the remake of La Femme Nikita.
A complete train wreck.
No contest, Barbara Streisand’s version of A Star Is Born
A future remake i won’t like:
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo!!
Noooooooo!!!
@David
I actually think the remake will be better. Outside of Noomi Rapace, I didn’t think Dragon Tattoo was all that good. Merely okay at best.
Rapace herself, however, WILL be hard to top, I think.
I’ll second ‘A Star is Born’. That’s 2 hours of my life I’ll never get back!
@ David
I’m really looking forward to David Fincher’s new version of the book TGWTDT. Great cast and if they get the screenplay right then the set ups for TGWPWF and TGWKTHN will be much better meaning that the 2nd & 3rd books will get much better films. The further the films went on, and with the change of director after Dragon, the weaker the movies got , because so much of the plot and Lisbeth’s character wasn’t explored in the first or 2nd movie.
Again they aren’t remakes, they are based on books and are no more remakes than Gnomeo & Juliet is a remake Baz Luhrman’s Romeo & ~Juliet or Branagh’s Hamlet is a remake of the one starring Mel Gibson.
Arthur < Hells Gate
Yentl. Hands down. Go home.
I stand by Marky Mark’s Truth About Charlie aka Charade. When you stop griping about it not being a serious remake then you get to enjoy the breezy New Wave spirit Demme infused into the fim. It’s loose, weird, creepy and funny. The music is great and the locations are lovely. People were expecting The American or The Tourist, which are both stuffy and stale. Demme made something frothy, silly and fun out of Charade. C’est tres cool.
I am right there with you. Poseidon SUCKED… the FOG- are you kidding me .. nothing like John Carpenters- which to me was classic, and why on earth would you try to remake Willie Wonka or an Affair to Remember…Here – come up with an original idea!!
Nobody remade Willy Wonka. There was however a new, and much more faithful, version of the Dahl classic “Charlie & The Chocolate Factory”. Some people loved it, some people hated it, but it was well regarded and people who didn’t love, or never got a nostalgic attraction to, Willy WOnka tendedd to love it.
But regardless of anyone’s opinion on which is better there’s no Willy WOnka remake that I’m aware of. Not in English anyway.
Burton’s version wasn’t THAT much more faithful. The whole mean dentist daddy backstory was stupid.
For all anyone but you cared, everton, it was a remake. I’m not fond of the original at all, but the remake was indulgent and awful. Tim Burton at his worst.
Definitely Poseidon!But Stepford Wives was pretty good. At least it had Nicole Kidman
@Nick T, really stepford wives was pretty good? it has a plot hole the size of jupiter. are they robots or is it a micro-chip in their brain. pick one and stick with it that movie was crap
The Day Of The Dead remake. Vegetarian zombies? No thanks.
Have to agree about the Willy Wonka remake, it was pretty bad.
Speaking of John Carpenter:
Rob Zombie’s Halloween remake is an affront to not only cinema, but mankind. Truly awful. I can’t decide if the sequel is slightly better, or a lot worse.
They were both horrible though.
It’s hard to say Wonka was a remake. I would say it’s another try at the book, like True Grit. And Burton’s Wonka was closer to the book than the original movie. Even with the dentist stuff.
@ Mike It’s a fact, as per cast, crew and the Dahls.
Here are some more facts. Roald Dahl was so disgusted with the Wonka film and it’s changing of much of what the book was about he turned down decent money and refused to let them make the sequel. So disgusted was he it was some time before the Dahl estate allowed anyone to film one of his stories, because of how strongly he reacted to that film: which was kind of unsuccessful when it came out (Although many great films were not a success when they 1st came out).
When Warners finally got the rights to Charlie the Dahl estate retained complete creative control, hence it being in development hell for years. They accepted Burton because of his respect for the source material and his desire to have it written with NO reference to the earlier version. Writer had never even seen the other film, let alone read its script.
It’s extremely faithful to the book, the Dahls themselves would have stopped it if it wasn’t and it couldn’t legally be a remake even if Warners had wanted it to be.
Again, just because it’s a Dahl approved, faithful adaptation of the book, doesn’t mean you have to like it, but I reckon he would, and those that knew him did too. More to the point, it is not a remake and if you don’t believe the cast, writers and director, or me, I suggest you do the next best thing to asking the author himself, contact the Dahl Estate.
@Frank – not a remake of WW as others have pointed out. While I think some parts of WW were better than the corresponding scene in CatCF, I found the more recent movie to be better overall and more respectful of the source material. When in doubt, read the book….
Dreadful dog of a movie. I walked up half way through this and asked for my money back. They fought me on it for about a minute and then I dragged them in to watch it, they were like, “just give this family their money back”.. The jig is up.
Worst movie ever is Yentl. If you can stomach that you deserve film movie passes for a year.
The worst John Carpenter remake was a remake of one of his first films, “Assault on Precinct 13″. The original is a classic, the remake with its “all star” cast with Ethan Hawke and Laurence Fishburn was a flaming pile of crap that bore little resemblance to its understated yet far superior original.
Vanilla Sky (remake of the spanish “Abre los ojos”)
bhm, I actually enjoyed the new AoP13, on its own terms. I DO agree that the original was better in every way. *SPOILER!* The gangbanger blowing away the little girl is still one of the biggest WTF moments in cinema! Ballsy as hell for those days.
BTW, if anyone thought this version of Author was going to be good was delusional as well. Never wanted to see this movie. If you’ve ever seen the Dudley Moore and Liza Minnelli version, there’s no way in hell would you want to see this crap. But it’s just my opinion.
Not to mention, it is Steve Johnson’s version. He was the originals writer and director. Someone who does both is putting up his vison of a modern day screwball comedy. For me, if someone is going to attempt to remake Arthur, it would stand a better chance at succeeding if one person loved the first version, had an idea on an alternate take on the material, wrote and then directed that version. But the way it works nowadays, the studio owns the property, assigns a writer(usually several) then finds a director to film that version(though usually with another writer that the director has selected to come up with another version). What do they say about too many cooks?
“Author”?
City of Angels is a good film in its ow right. Also don’t blame Burton for Apes, that ay film managed to get out of the “We’ve scheduled a release for 8 months from now and no lack of script, time for special effects and we’re giving you maybe 2/3 of the budget you need / were promised” hell hole that is much of Fox’s sci-fi output these days! Did’t Burton call it the worst experience of his life or career?
Did you actually see Wings of Desire?
I said City of Angels is a good film “in its own right”, I neither said it was better or as good as the movie it was based on, just that it’s a good film. Niether Magnificent 7 or A Fistful of Dollars (for example) are as good as 7 Samurai and Yojimbo, but they’re still good / very good films.
If it had Russell Brand in it you knew it had to be bad. I did not see the movie as the trailers I saw were more than enough for me to know it would be a terrible waste of money.
I agree, what is the appeal about Russell Brand?? I can’t stand anything he has done. And the worst was when he hosted (I think) the MTV awards. He just S@CKS!
Its weird how America kisses the @sses of British. The media goes out of their way to brown nose any media personality from the UK. Its a weak accent that has no impression upon me.
Thanks for insulting 60 million people with a very diverse range of accents Even if yoy want to be really simple and say Welsh, Scotish, N. Irish and English people all have 1 accent each, which they / we don’t, you’ve got 4 different, contrasting accents just there.
People are attracted to different accent the world over, not just in your media; you aren’t that’s fine, but try not to insult an entirecountry because you don’t like whichever from the UK it is that you don’t like.
Terrible sentence. IF Wales, Scotland, N. Ireland and England all have just one accent, then Britain would have 4 accents. That’s more like it.
We can all be stereotypical Kim: Americans have total self-absorption & a lack of worldview.
Well, Kim, I’m glad you’re not fooled by a British accent or whatever, but personally, I love the sound of them. Any of them. Even the ones that are utterly unintelligible to me. It’s just fun. And any Irish or Scottish accent immediately warms my wee little heart and…well let’s just say that adding any sort of British (or Australian, for that matter) accent on a guy bumps his hotness rating up several points. I can’t help it. I am exactly the kind of girl whom Colin from Love Actually would have successfully preyed upon. Also, a “weak accent”? What an absurd thing to say. People speak how they speak; it has nothing to do with weakness or strength. (Or intelligence or friendliness, for that matter.)
Russell = Terrible Film
Brand was very good in Forgetting Sarah Marshall and his stand up is very good. It’s probably always a mistake to reprise a role that was done perfectly. Moore was amazing.
As for the Dahl comments, as a raging anti-semite, it probably bothered him that Wilder starred and Albertson co-starred. The movie may have not been as faithful to the book as the remake. But it was better.
The argument as to whether or not Dahl was an anti-semite is long, complex and could carry on forever, so it’s best to leave that alone. To suggest that has more to do with it than the dislike of the fact that wholesale changes were made to the story, thees ames and focus of the book is blinkered and disingenuous at best. It also doesn’t explain the subsequent withdrawl from any adaptations of his works.
The 2nd movie WAs more faithful, it’s a matter of fact not opinion. Now as to which is the better film, That has a fair amount to do with personal opinion, but it’s a better quality of script, not too difficult and it’s far more popular than the Wilder version. Popularity doesn’t equate to quality.
Of course none of that matters because it isn’t a remake, that’s a matter of legal fact.
I personally loved You’ve Got Mail. All of the complaints mentioned are totally founded, but for some reason I can sit and watch that movie on an endless loop.
me too! I love it.
I am watching it right now.. I love it.. it grew on me.
You’ve Got Mail is my favorite romantic comedy. Funny, considering I barely even remember the days of dial-up and early AOL. But there’s something about it – the conflict is a semi-valid reason to keep them apart, and it’s from the era where romcoms weren’t yet misogynistic, cynical and snarky. (Katharine Heigl, I’m looking at you!)
Also love You’ve Got Mail. But then again, I also liked the remake of Sabrina, and I think I’m the only one on Earth.
No….I like the remake of Sabrina….
I like the Sabrina remake too.
I also loved You’ve Got Mail-one of my favorite movies!!
I may get killed for saying this, but I think the remake of Sabrina is far superior to the original. The original is very dated, and the remake stays fresh when watched. I say this as someone who loves Bogart, Holden and Hepburn and the film.
Yes the re-make of Sabrina underwhelmed at the box office, and didn’t get the best reviews. But, it wasn’t that bad.
I loved the remake of Sabrina. It wasn’t a classic or anything, but it was still a cute movie!
The romance in the remake was much more believable than the original. The premise that someone would NOT fall in love with William Holden is ludicrous.
Same. The only thing dated about it is the internet technology. I’ve seen The Shop Around the Corner (years after YGM), and I hardly found it fast or funny. It was much more dated and old-fashioned, and sorry, but Hanks and Ryan all the way.
I got really tired of Meg Ryan’s litte-girly mannerisms. How old was she then– in her thirties at least? She was tiptoing aroud like a twelve-year-old. I also got pretty tired of Nora Ephron”s snobby tone in the movie. Not everyone who can’t afford expensive Manhattan boutique bookstores is a philistine.
37. And I didn’t much care for that attitude, either. I don’t hate the movie, but I will agree that The Shop Around the Corner was far superior, largely because it didn’t feature social commentary about commercialism. It was purely about the dynamic between the store’s employees. Much more interesting, IMO. The David-and-Goliath motif may be classical, but its introduction seemed like a lazy way to update the movie while removing the original dynamic.
I also love You’ve got Mail.” In my top 3 fav romantic comedies
1st date question. Do you like You’ve Got Mail? If the answer is Yes, then slip out and leave her with the check.
YOU’VE GOT MAIL is all right, in my book. What might be less all right – c’est the beautiful minds of those who think it all right not. Just say’n.
- -
There might be many undeserved remakes in this universe, but for now, somehow I couldn’t help but naturally thinking of THE LAKE HOUSE. The original version is called IL MARE (Korean movie), which is far better than the earlier mentioned, relatively over-budgeted, ill-produced Hollywood remake starring Keanu R. and Sandra B; not to mention the production budget that might allow for a buyout of one small 3rdworld country.
I love it too! I think Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks’ chemistry makes it. It’s goofy, but watching it always puts me in a good mood.
I love it too! Maybe it’s just because my mom basically raised me on 90s romcoms (which might not be as good as classic romantic comedies/dramas, but are certainly superior to today’s), or maybe it’s cause of the perfect soundtrack (probably one of the most expensive movie soundtracks ever). Or maybe it’s cause it’s not just a remake of Shop Around the Corner (which I also love), but a modern day version of Pride and Prejudice (my favorite book!) that unlike most classic-works-made-into-contemporary-set-films doesn’t scream at us it’s literary heritage. (Well, except for the scene where they actually talk about P&P, but still…)
You couldn’t pay me enough money to sit through this.
I loved You’ve Got Mail as well. Change the dialup to cable/dsl and you’ve got something.
But everything is Facebook now so the sight unseen would’ve never happened
And Hanks’ store going under due to online sales.
Me too. It’s the chemistry between Hanks and Ryan, the setting and of course, Brinkley.
Yay Brinkley! One of the best dog names ever.
Oh, I’m glad other people said this as well. I loved ‘You’ve got mail’. Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan were wonderful in it!
Another lover of YGM. I enjoy The Shop Around the Corner, and I think ‘Mail’ is a fresh update. Now, The Women remake is just ghastly.
The American remake of The Lake House and every other Korean romance. Just stop trying to make foreign films more “mainstream” Hollywood, it’s obviously not working.
True Lies, Magnificent 7 (arguably Star Wars, very long argument given the 1001 sources for Star Wars but it’s there); 12 Monkeys, The Birdcage..
There are a lot that haven’t worked, but plenty have too.
Let me in, theres a film that was never going to be mainstream, no matter the language, because it’s “slow” and “talky”. They are what makes it so good, but what meant Let Me In was never likely to be a big hit.
Sorry if it wan’t clear, those are 4 very successful “Hollywood” remakes of “foreign” films.
Um… First of all… Those movies are awesome. But that’s besides the point…
Magnificent 7 is a remake of Akira Kurosawa’s The Seven Samurai, not STAR WARS. That’s why it’s called the Magnificent 7… It was also made in 1960, 17 years before Star Wars… so… typo?
Never mind… where you saying Star Wars is a remake? I’m confused…
“Star Wars” is fairly heavily inspird by Kurosawa’s “The Hidden Frotress”.
You should watch Hidden Fortress before you comment on it. “Heavily inspired” does not mean 2 minor characters and 1 plot point. It also does not make it a remake.
Lucas linked SW to Hidden Fortress in an attempt to add gravitas for his silly movie back when he cared about such things (he clearly did not by the time the prequels rolled around – see Jar Jar).
Oh god not that old Kurosawa bit again. Will you guys give it a rest already??
@ Tom
What Kurosawa bit? Hidden Fortress, 7 Samurai or Yojimbo? and what about it needs to be rested, so we know, to give it a rest….
Does anyone remember that awful One Missed Call remake from 2008? I’ve been trying hard not to.
I remember that one being so bad, they made fun of it in another movie, “Forgetting Sarah Marshall”. Apparently, Sarah starred in a film about a phone that could kill you and a character pointed out, “Why wouldn’t you just hang up?” LOL
I always thought that was a reference to Kristen Bell’s own horrible remake of Pulse. That was a god awful remake!
Is that the only movie not to be shared with anyone on the Pirate Bay?
Clash Of The Titans. Even 3D couldn’t save this garbage.
I didn’t really like either one. I didn’t see it in 3D (I hate unnecessary 3D) but I was bugged by the fact that they are Greek, but they have British accents. That’s just me being picky. The original was cheesy and the new one was way over the top.
Hollywood has no original ideas anymore. Hey look at this comicbook I picked up today??? derp
no original ideas? what about inception? very original, whatever you thought of it, you have to give nolan credit for a very original idea.
yeah right – cos the Harry Hamlin version was a reel classic.
I don’t agree with the hypothesis of the article, as I’ve written about for Syfy in the past.
Firstly they aren’t always remaking “beloved” films or classics. Often they are films that nobody has really heard of (mainstream audiences I mean) Example, even now do we really think there are significant numbers of the general public who have ever seen one of the Infernal Affairs trilogy, let alone all 3? Better yet I’d wager that large numbers don’t even know they exist, despite The Departed winning Oscars.
How about La Jette? Superbly “re-imagined” as 12 Monkeys? La Totale? No? Yojimbo? How about the Chinese version of Blood Simple? Despite numerous articles on the subject, including mine AND an eerily similar one that appeared, subsequently, in The Guardian, most people don’t know that Bogart’s Maltese Falcon is the THIRD film based on that book. I know that it isn’t a remake, but far too many people still insist on calling films based on books that have previously been adapted “remakes” (see the annoying righteous indignation on the NOT REMAKES True Grit and Millennium Trilogy)So I bring Falcon into for that reason, also because all 3 versions were made in just about 10 years!
Remakes don’t have to be better they just have to be good. It’s like the old argument what’s better, Godfather or Godfather Pt II? Alien or Aliens? In neither case does it matter because in both cases both original and sequel are excellent films. (In both cases the sequels are the better movie)….. Begin arguments here. But there’s this idea, this feeling that in somehow praising one film you’re condemning the other. You’re not, so if you like The Birdcage, but feel it’s a crime because you should, or do, like La Cage Aux Follies more, don’t worry it is ok!
Yojimbo is better than A fistful of Dollars, but that doesn’t mean we must condemn Fistful to some hideous remakes are rubbish scrapheap does it? Ditto Magnificent 7 isn’t as good as Seven Samurai, but it doesn’t matter.
There are some bad remakes, some good ones and some great ones; In all honesty I’m not sure that the ratio of good to bad is any better or worse than that for standard movies. Over 130 films will be released in the states this year, how many of those will be any good? It’s probable that the percentage won’t differ very much from the percentage of remakes that are good.
Nobody said all remakes were bad. They just said some were, and this is undeniable. And when a remake is bad, it’s WORSE than when a new film is bad, because they’re messing with something great and turning it awful. Obviously the WHOLE POINT of remaking something is to recapture its good qualities (or should be – these days, it’s just branding). So bad remakes fail at their first, fundamental purpose.
My personal candidates for worst remake ever would include “Just Go With It,” which took all the charm and joy of “Cactus Flower” and flushed them. I also want to point out that “You’ve Got Mail” is not the first cutesy-fication of “The Shop Around the Corner” — I think that honor belongs to “In The Good Ol’ Summertime” with Judy Garland and Van Johnson. It’s musicalized there, and Judy’s singing keeps it from being atrocious, but it’s still no match for the original material.
Hello again Fiona, I also argued that remakes are notof either great (or even good) films. But more to the point I agree that when you get a remake of something entertaining and it is poor it is MORE annoying. Clash of The Titans had a decent “original” movie AND a set of millennia old Myths to draw on so to come out with that mess was inexcusable. Worse the pathetic rush job conversion to alledged 3D meant that the one trump it still had, better effects, was ruined too.
I somewhat disagree with your premise that remakes don’t have to surpass the original, “they just have to be good.” The presumption is, when one undertakes to reimagine someone else’s finished product on film, that he/she has something new or relevant to say. Comparing remakes to sequels doesn’t really wash, as they’re most often apples and oranges. I look at it this way: if I’m going to be cynically pandered to by a studio system that wholeheartedly embraces the “everything old is new again (…and again)” concept of movie-making, it’d better be good. So yeah, I do tend to expect more from a remake.
That said, I agree with you regarding “The Women.” I actually don’t understand where all the outrage comes from. Yes, it’s a badly-cast, shrill vanity project masquerading as nostalgia, but it was still an improvement over the original. Like you said, just because it’s a “classc” doesn’t mean it’s any good.
Wait did I read this right, you think the remake of The Women is better than the original? I don’t have my contacts in so I’m guessing I’m imagining silly crazy things.
That’s why you don’t think they have to be better. To quote Spock, “You proceed from a false assumption.”
Actually, first of all the reason I used sequels is because, generally, it is accepted that those are 4 very, very good films. As such I could use them, and a popular set of arguments, which in those series of movies is better? The first movie or the second? The consensus is that in both cases it’s the 2nd movie, but again that doesn’t matter here. All that matters, for the purpose of my post, is that when you have 2 movies that are that good (which ever pairing best suits your tastes) then it doesn’t really matter. So IF, you happen to be a big fan of Infernal Affairs AND a big fan of The Departed or Yojimbo & A Fistful of Dollars (I own all 4 btw) does it really matter which is better? No. It only mattered that The Departed be a good film. We hoped it would be a brilliant film, as its source was, but a good film was what was needed. I think it’s great, but not as good. Ditto Fistful and Magnificent 7, but I think 12 Monkeys & True Lies a re better than their source movies.
But here’s where your false assumption comes in. Sometimes the reason to remake a film, often in fact, is simply to get a good story, well told to YOUR audience. Yojimbo, 7 Samurai, La Jette, La Totale and Infernal Affairs are still films that most English Speaking countries’ average movie watchers probably don’t even know exist, let alone have taken the time to watch. So making films better, or as good, as the original version, whilst always the aim (you hope) isn’t main aim. It’s getting that to your audience.
Here’s a slightly skewed example. Gatchaman was “altered” / remade into Battle of The Planets, in the 70s. It was inferior and I would argue that it was never intended to be better than Gatchaman; what it did need to do was be suitable for an American audience. It was far too violent, and arguably complex, for transmission in America, and many other countries, in its original Japanese form. Quality, wasn’t really a factor, accessability and relatability was.
So many remakes seek to offer a different perspective, more fitting to the country, the times they are made in, but very often the filmmakers have far too much respect to assume that they are making something better. Different yes, rarely would they display so much Hubris as to say they were making better. I mean can you imagine, forgetting the fact that it’s garbage, if the makers of Barb Wire had declared they were trying to improve on Casablanca? Or Battle Beyond The Stars was to be better than Magnificent 7 and 7 Samurai? It’s to give a good story to your audience, not a better story.
Even when making new versions of books previously filmed, the declaration is to do a “truer to the source” version, not necessarily better, but different, or more faithful. The Chinese Blood Simple, for example or Japanese Spider-Man (TV). So it isn’t always or even usually about better.
therealeverton – Maybe we should just dispense with the term “better.” “Better” isn’t really the point (and who’s the arbiter of “better” anyway?) – which is why I used the word “surpass.” I said that I “expect more” from remakes – a fresh perspective, a cultural bridge from then to now, a surprising fresh helping of relevance in an unexpected place. I suspect others expect that too, since people get so cranky when Hollywood sets about redoing something they’ve seen before. I still disagree with the sequel comparison, especially the “Godfather” analogy. Two years and the same director separate I and II, so it’s really a matter of obsessive cinephile beancounting which is “better.” “The Women” remake crossed nearly seventy years and needed to plug in to some pretty massive cultural change. Is Godfather II relevant to Godfather I? Of course – it’s a continuation of an epic story, cast, created, paced and told by the same people. Is retooling “The Women” relevant to the 21st movie-going audience? Maybe in better hands, and with a better cast, that 70 year gap wouldn’t have seemed so glaring.
There is value, I agree, in the desire of filmmakers to retell stories that resonated with them, and by doing so, exposing little-seen arthouse or foreign movies to a Western audience. Cross-cultural remakes, I would say, are a very different category of their own. Remakes in that capacity have their own built-in relevance, and comparisons to their originals sort of fall by the wayside for all but the most ardent niche-driven fans.
My girlfriend wanted me to watch Ryan’s The Women which I hadn’t seen so we watched it back to back with the original. Well, we both wound up hating the remake, so I’d have to put this on the bad remake list. Chalie and … and True Grit I thought were okay but not as good as the originals.
my gf wanted to watch that Ryan movie, and we broke up later on that evening..
I went to the bar and hooked up with some random girl that didn’t torture me with rental movies from hell.
I hear you, Tom. But I have shoved so many horror and drive in style films down her throat, not to mention a ton of westerns a genre she previously hated but gained a new appreciation for. So I have to let her pick a film once in a while while I smile over grated teeth. Maid of Honor was almost too much for me to bear though.
Neil LaBute’s remake of The Wicker Man, hands down!
cosign
but it had BEEEEEEEES!!!
The original’s no better.
Hush your mouth!
The original version’s soundtrack is cool…
The original is creepy and realistic — you actually feel like you’ve been swept to an island off Britain for an hour and a hald — in the remake, you feel like you’ve been up Nic Cage’s a__hole for an hour and a half.
trendy garbage
Oooh good one. I’m still trying to clean my brain of Nic Cage in a bear suit.
The Longest Yard. -Burt looks like a quarterback, Adam’s a “Waterboy”.
That is my pick. Skinny, 5’10″ Adam Sandler was a pro QB? So bad I did not see it.
The original was so awesome and Sandler and crew messed up EVERYTHING from the awesome opening scene of the original all the way through to the guards v. inmates game. Why the frack did anyone attempt to remake something so damn good with such an unnecessary pile of dirt? Adam Sandler for Burt Reynolds should have been the best reason for staying home.
Aw, damn, someone beat me to it. The Longest Yard was one of my family’s favorites growing up. I avoided the remake at the theater but rented it and hated myself for it afterwards.
It hasn’t been made yet, but with the news surrounding it, I nominate Akira. It will probably top the list once it’s released in theaters.
Does is glow in the dark?
The Gawd-awful remake of The Women starring Meg Ryan and her hair. Some remakes are just plain wrong and this is def one of the them.
WhenPsycho, a Stranger Calls, Halloween and Halloween 2, Shutter, The Grudge, One Missed Call, Superman…
I was readin about this the other day and much of it does not sound promising. However the version they are making now is a direct adaptatio of the first 3 Manga (comics), which not only offers the possability that it could be better (unlikely I feel without Teenagers or the Japanese setting) but the also the fact that it isn’t a remake. At the moment, things can change again, it is not a remake, so it can’t be one of the best or worst no matter how it turns out. (I does reek of a film they have to churn out before they lose the rights!
Another great remake besides The Departed is The Magnificent Seven (Seven Samurai).
I have my hopes up for Fincher’s adaptation of Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.
I don’t think using the same source material should be considered a remake. All movies based on Shakespeare or Jane Austin novels are not remakes. And as bad as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was it was not based on Willy Wonka.
Indeed. However I think Mr Dahl would have liked Burton’s film as much, if not more, than he hated the Willy Wonka film. Of course there’s no way for me to know, but it seems that way, based on his family etc.