15 Jul 09
Remakes only make sense if technological advances and an enhanced budget are going to make for a better production. But all too often remakes are about substituting unknown "foreign" actors with well-known American actors, and in those cases the remakes seldom surpass the quality of the originals.
17 Jul 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Gatecrasheri'd like to see Antonioni's 'Il Deserto Rosso' remade with Paul Verhoeven directing, Jerry Bruckheimer executive producing, and Tom Cruise and Kate Beckinsale starring.🙄
Remakes only make sense if technological advances and an enhanced budget are going to make for a better production. But all too often remakes are about substituting unknown "foreign" actors with well-known American actors, and in those cases the remakes seldom surpass the quality of the originals.
21 Jul 09
Originally posted by BlackampThe problem with remakes is that too many of them are made of movies that were good to begin with. The most critically successful remakes are those that remake older movies with compelling ideas but poor or mediocre execution.
to be honest, i wish 'they' would think up some original ideas for movies, rather than going the lazy route with remakes. remakes are rarely as good as the original, imho.
John Carpenter's 'The Thing' was good, though.
I also do not subscribe to the idea that all narratives are a re-hash of the 3 main plots (or the 7 main plots, or the 36 main plots, etc... depending on how detailed you want to get), and that creativity is dead. This is backwards. People respond more to a limited number of basic motivations, as identified in the main plots, and so more (and more successful) books, screenplays, etc... incorporate them. The creativity lies in the art and craft of refining and intensifying the experience.
Books and movies are not about what they are (ostensibly) about, but how they are about it.