The (Ugly) Truth About Movie Remakes
As a fan of movies, I am always a little bit skittish when it comes to the words "remake" or even worse, "reimagining." For those of you who are unfamiliar with these terms, a remake is generally a new version of an old movie. The "old" film could have originally been in black-and-white, color, or possibly foreign. Unfortunately, the majority of remakes fall way short of their predecessors. (I'll go on that rant in a later entry.)
Each year, we seem to be hit with more and more remakes. Take a look back at the last two, just for starters. This summer alone there's "The Longest Yard," "The Bad News Bears," "War of the Worlds," "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," "Herbie," "The Fog..." and so on. Do all of these remakes mean that writers are out of ideas? Is Hollywood afraid to take a chance on something new? Or is it the sincerest form of flattery, as some film students might argue.
We recently took the the girls to see a remake that I was actually quite excited about, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." Instead of reviewing that film here (although I will say, I loved it, but the original will always be in my top 10 movies of all time list---I was three when I first saw it!), I had an enlightening experience during the previews.
Amongst many forgettable trailers, we saw one for yet another version of "Pride and Prejudice." If you don't remember the classic Jane Austen novel, it's worth a read. But honestly, this movie has already been visited several times, with the best one being the 1940 original. As I sighed, rather loudly, and thought how dreadful it was, Hannah leaned over to me and asked, "Can we see this one, Mommy? It has Kiera Knightly from Pirates in it!" In a flash, it all started to make sense to me.
In 2005, when most 8 and 9 year old girls are begging their parents to see "Herbie: Fully Loaded," mine are thinking that "Pride and Prejudice" looks pretty cool. I could have never talked them into sitting through the B&W original one. But now they could watch the same story with an actress they know and like, possibly igniting a passion for other versions of the same film. Or better yet, maybe even reading the novel one day. If nothing else, they would be seeing something that wasn't just "brain candy" kiddie fare.
So, are remakes evil and bad, the downfall of modern filmmaking? Probably not. But I'd stay away from "Psycho (1998)," "The Truth About Charlie" and "The Stepford Wives (2004)" if I were you.
Each year, we seem to be hit with more and more remakes. Take a look back at the last two, just for starters. This summer alone there's "The Longest Yard," "The Bad News Bears," "War of the Worlds," "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," "Herbie," "The Fog..." and so on. Do all of these remakes mean that writers are out of ideas? Is Hollywood afraid to take a chance on something new? Or is it the sincerest form of flattery, as some film students might argue.
We recently took the the girls to see a remake that I was actually quite excited about, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." Instead of reviewing that film here (although I will say, I loved it, but the original will always be in my top 10 movies of all time list---I was three when I first saw it!), I had an enlightening experience during the previews.
Amongst many forgettable trailers, we saw one for yet another version of "Pride and Prejudice." If you don't remember the classic Jane Austen novel, it's worth a read. But honestly, this movie has already been visited several times, with the best one being the 1940 original. As I sighed, rather loudly, and thought how dreadful it was, Hannah leaned over to me and asked, "Can we see this one, Mommy? It has Kiera Knightly from Pirates in it!" In a flash, it all started to make sense to me.
In 2005, when most 8 and 9 year old girls are begging their parents to see "Herbie: Fully Loaded," mine are thinking that "Pride and Prejudice" looks pretty cool. I could have never talked them into sitting through the B&W original one. But now they could watch the same story with an actress they know and like, possibly igniting a passion for other versions of the same film. Or better yet, maybe even reading the novel one day. If nothing else, they would be seeing something that wasn't just "brain candy" kiddie fare.
So, are remakes evil and bad, the downfall of modern filmmaking? Probably not. But I'd stay away from "Psycho (1998)," "The Truth About Charlie" and "The Stepford Wives (2004)" if I were you.
1 Comments:
Interesting read. I hate hate HATED the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory with Johnny Depp. I have a feeling he'll be getting award for that performance.
As for remakes in general, I hate 'em. Remakes should be bottom of the barrell ideas, not, "let's do a quick remake of Dukes of Hazzard and make a couple million."
Sequals, however, are very very good, in my mind. Mike Myers is a master of sequals, making two Wayne's World's and three Austin Powers' -- all quality comedies. They all stand apart, as they include all new jokes, situations, and tones, yet they have the same lovable characters.
It's movies like Barbershop 2 and Deuce Bigalow 2 that give sequals a bad name.
Post a Comment
<< Home