do you give re-makes a chance or put them down right away??

[TX85]

Every time there's a rumor or news about a movie possibly being re-made/re-imagined,There's always people right away going into internet rage and completely shutting down the idea without even giving it the smallest chance by waiting for a teaser and even after that,It don't matter cause most people are convinced it's a bad idea and so they'll rip it apart and be negative and thus not even up enjoying it at all when it comes out!

Sure the new version may be totally different as most times,But even IF it was very similar then there would still be people b*tching by saying"oh,it's just the same and so it's very unoriginal and should have just left the original"

unoriginal can't be good at all??,As a movie on it's own and still don't enjoy it then there's always the most simple&logical solution to these"damn re-makes".....Go back and stay or collect the originals for your dvd collection!,They will always be there no matter what and same for your memories and so might as well just forget all about the new version.

No need to go b*ching for months about it and hope for it's doom when you can just simply ignore the fact that it's being made and just go see something else on opening night!

ME personally,even IF I think a new version is decent at most on it's own and IF it's part of a big franchise then there's a big chance it'll end up in my dvd/blu-ray collection cause at most times I'll love anything related to a series cause of characters&concept.There's always spots for the originals&new ones in collections!

 

[MMMMM...Pancakes]

I'll usually give remakes a chance, if there is good buzz about it or the trailer/footage impresses me I'll definitely check it out.

 

[redhawk23]

Depends on the property, there are some things when its just like, why the hell remake it?

And then they come out and its exactly the same, why remake it?

Flight of the Pheonix, the remake of that served no purpose at all.


I have no problem with remakes changing things, if everything is exactly the same, why remake them?

The Thing is an awesome movie on its own, and a fantastic remake of of The Thing from another world.

 

[Drizzle]

I'm usually more lenient about horror remakes. One of my favorite horror movies is in fact a remake (The Hills Have Eyes) which I thought improved on the original in every way.

 

[Octoberist]

I really think that out of 5 remakes, one will be decent. That's the problem: The intent of most remakes is not to see a franchise with a new modern vision that's relevent; it's to capitalize on the brand name.

That's why 'Arthur' as a remake is questionable: most people don't know or even seen the original (unles you're a film buff or an older person). So why remake it?

 

[Ultra Lantern]

I give all remakes a chance.I saw Arthur and thought it was good.Saturday,I'm going to rent the original Arthur and compare the two.

 

[<(o_o)>]

I give all remakes a chance.I saw Arthur and thought it was good.Saturday,I'm going to rent the original Arthur and compare the two.

There is also a sequel called Arthur 2: On The Rocks.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I give all remakes a chacne as long as they are good. I give mainly horror remakes a chance because there are really good ones out there.

 

[Figs]

It all depends on the movie. If it's a remake of a classic(cult classic or regular classic), I tend to avoid them. I'm not looking forward to the Robocop or Jaws remakes.

 

[Warhammer]

I give remakes a chance because you'll never know.

 

[DorkyFresh]

like others, i say it depends on the property. i would never give a remake of 'the Abyss' a chance but Matt Reeves is creating a movie on the story that 'They Lives' was based on. i wouldn't mind seeing a remake of 'Escape from New York' if done properly, etc.

if the movie was done very well to begin with and is still enjoyable to watch today then i don't think it should be remade...but if the movie was a good idea that was executed in a way that isn't watchable then by all means, remake it.

 

[Nemi]

I also think it depends on the movie. Some movies can benefit from a remake with better technology and a better budget and some are just an atempt to make easy money.

 

[Rac]

It really depends on the people making the remake, and how strong the original was.

 

[Watchman]

I really depends on the people making the remake.

This. When Aronofsky was on Robocop I was excited for it and True Grit by the Coen Brothers was great. There are a few times that remakes actually have great talent behind it and can been fantastic movies.

 

[Boom]

Depends on what the film is, and who's directing.

 

[Mace Dolex]

Depends on what film it is for example Ang Lee's Hulk sorely needed the Edward Norton rebooted version.

I just don't like reboots/remakes of films that are barely under 10 years released, give it some time so that audiences will demand to see a newer version of any given franchise.

 

[Eggyman]

How could I not give them a chance after seeing Dawn of the Dead?

 

[Thundarr]

I think the estimate that 1 out of 5 remakes will be any good is a bit much. I think it's closer to 1 out of 10 remakes, maybe even 1 out of 20.

It seems like for every good remake we get, like The Thing, there are infinately more stinkers flooding the market like Halloween, A Nightmare On Elm Street, and Friday The 13th.

I do try and give the remakes a chance, I really do. I go in with low expectations and an open mind. But unfortunately, so many of them miss the mark so badly it's hard not to go in expecting them to fail.

I will admit, stylistically (is that even a word?), I was rather impressed with A Nightmare On Elm Street. It even made me jump on a few occassions (and it's VERY rare that horror movies have that effect on me any more), so that was quite refreshing. But they rewrote Freddy's history, which made the whole thing a massive failure for me.

 

[The Morningstar]

Depends. If it's obvious that a remake is a blatant cash grab, then it ain't getting my money.

If it seems that there is some actual thought and passion put into it, I'll give it a chance.

 

[dude stannis]

I figure if the film is obscure enough like Death Race 2000, 3:10 to Yuma, The Mechanic, The Thing From Another World, etc and the remake is a good, and different, film on it's own right, then yeah, by all means remake it.

For famous films, still very popular to this day, I find it stupid to remake them. Commerce is the only reason. I find that major entertainment providers are less interested in customer satisfaction and more interested in brand recognition. I've been surprised maybe twice. True Grit and Dawn of the Dead.

 

[redhawk23]

I really think that out of 5 remakes, one will be decent. That's the problem: The intent of most remakes is not to see a franchise with a new modern vision that's relevent; it's to capitalize on the brand name.

That's why 'Arthur' as a remake is questionable: most people don't know or even seen the original (unles you're a film buff or an older person). So why remake it?

From what I've heard Brand was basically born to play the part. If you can bring something good and worthwhile, I don't really mind remakes.

 

[The Morningstar]

That's why 'Arthur' as a remake is questionable: most people don't know or even seen the original (unles you're a film buff or an older person). So why remake it?

To introduce it to a new generation.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Every time there's a rumor or news about a movie possibly being re-made/re-imagined,There's always people right away going into internet rage and completely shutting down the idea without even giving it the smallest chance by waiting for a teaser and even after that,It don't matter cause most people are convinced it's a bad idea and so they'll rip it apart and be negative and thus not even up enjoying it at all when it comes out!

Sure the new version may be totally different as most times,But even IF it was very similar then there would still be people b*tching by saying"oh,it's just the same and so it's very unoriginal and should have just left the original"

unoriginal can't be good at all??,As a movie on it's own and still don't enjoy it then there's always the most simple&logical solution to these"damn re-makes".....Go back and stay or collect the originals for your dvd collection!,They will always be there no matter what and same for your memories and so might as well just forget all about the new version.

No need to go b*ching for months about it and hope for it's doom when you can just simply ignore the fact that it's being made and just go see something else on opening night!

ME personally,even IF I think a new version is decent at most on it's own and IF it's part of a big franchise then there's a big chance it'll end up in my dvd/blu-ray collection cause at most times I'll love anything related to a series cause of characters&concept.There's always spots for the originals&new ones in collections!

There does seem to be a weird notion out there that a story can only be told once....then it's "hands off!". That must be an obscure rule because I've never seen it written down anywhere.

I also find the "it's not necessary" argument odd. There has not yet been a single movie that was "necessary". The world would be just fine if the motion picture was never invented. If there is a single person that loves a remake...it was "necessary". Their opinion counts too. Big Brother doesn't decide what movies we get to like.

I think fans of movies think that a remake will supplant it or damage it in some way. The opposite is true of course. Remakes always spark interesting in the original movies and raise their public profile. Typically, every review of a remake will bring up the original. I tried to rent the original True Grit from Netflix for several months while the pub for the remake was going strong and it was impossible to get. "Very long wait". It just recently became available again....but I had already given up and bought it by then (the remake resulted in another sale). A LOT of people saw the original because of the remake.

And before that Let Me In raised the profile of Let the Right One In (though both are still little-known) and the novel that both movies are based on. The novel actually jumped back on the best-seller list. The fact that Let Me In was awesome doesn't hurt either. The director of LTROI, Tomas Alfredson, is working his next project now...Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy ....and it's a remake! (that's pretty funny)

Same thing just happened with Arthur. Here it is in my Netflix queue:

See the benefit a remake has? Arthur wasn't going to see "very long wait"...ever.

I own the first Arthur and am overjoyed about the remake getting people talking about it again. I've had more conversations about Arthur in the past month than the previous 10 years. I hope they remake it every 15 years or so.

So, since Let Me In and True Grit were so wonderful...coupled with the fact that remakes help the original movies so much...you won't catch me complaining about them.

 

[TX85]

^too true!

 

[Spider-Fan]

Depends on the movie. I think some remakes are warranted, but some aren't.