They should only remake movies if they were bad but had good premises, or if there's a new spin on it. Like Romeo & Juliet. That's a classic, but the Leonardo Dicaprio/Claire Danes version was new and refreshing. Remaking Psycho shot for shot? WHY??? Other examples from TV are BSG and Buffy. The originals flopped, but the reimagined versions took those ideas and created amazing stories. Total Recall? That was a great movie, and there's no need to remake it unless you have a completely new idea for it, like it takes place in the 1800s, or it's a musical or the entire cast is children (not saying those are good ideas, just giving examples).
That reminds me of the trailer I saw for the remake of The Last House on the Left, an old Wes Craven horror movie about two girls who get raped and murdered, and how one of the girl's family gets revenge. It's a very disturbing film, as you can imagine.
So they're remaking it, and I'm like, why? It was a great psychological horror film for it's time. I also see that it's a little bit different (the girl whose family gets revenge actually survives), but still. Maybe they thought it needed better effects or gore makeup? Whatever.
It's not like there aren't original scripts out there. I just think movie producers are super lazy.
I've got to agree that the Psycho remake was surely the most pointless of all time. The link did say that with all the improvements in SFX, they could make it look a whole lot better but even that's not enough to justify a remake, imho. As you say, if you are going to remake a movie, it's got to be significantly different or add something substantial to the original, not just trot out the old one in brighter colours.
Perhaps in these financially difficult times, this is considered a safer option, perhaps?
Or maybe we have just got old enough that we recognise remakes? ;-)
Perhaps in these financially difficult times, this is considered a safer option, perhaps?
They still gotta pay someone to write the new script.
One thing about the Psycho remake though, I don't remember Norman Bates masturbating in the original. That was different, at least (and really creeped me out). Think Hitchcock would have appreciated that?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
MAKE THEM STOP!
no subject
no subject
That reminds me of the trailer I saw for the remake of The Last House on the Left, an old Wes Craven horror movie about two girls who get raped and murdered, and how one of the girl's family gets revenge. It's a very disturbing film, as you can imagine.
So they're remaking it, and I'm like, why? It was a great psychological horror film for it's time. I also see that it's a little bit different (the girl whose family gets revenge actually survives), but still. Maybe they thought it needed better effects or gore makeup? Whatever.
It's not like there aren't original scripts out there. I just think movie producers are super lazy.
no subject
Perhaps in these financially difficult times, this is considered a safer option, perhaps?
Or maybe we have just got old enough that we recognise remakes? ;-)
no subject
They still gotta pay someone to write the new script.
One thing about the Psycho remake though, I don't remember Norman Bates masturbating in the original. That was different, at least (and really creeped me out). Think Hitchcock would have appreciated that?
no subject
I gave up watching the Psycho remake fairly quickly so I don't remember that scene!