Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Sleep, Eat or Empire by Warhol.

Some one wants to go and redo Batman-Dracula though then power to them !

Can I expand on that one. ANYTHING BY ANDY WARHOL.

OH, and if any hyper-violent films are to be re-made, or indeed, any American Gang Exploitation type films, then I would like to start a petition right now to demand they are set in Victorian England, and protrayed exclusively with Gentleman Thugs, ala Raffles out of Viz.

'Fornicate that, Bunny old chap. I fancy mandibling someone'

@MDG, that's just Clockwork all over again, per the OP.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I fail to see that as particularly "historical".

Great adaptation of Conrad, but not historical.

True, it isn't historical but it's certainly 'of it's time'. Which is more the point, to my mind, it isn't about the quality of the original but a film existing in a certain place and time. You could make Apocalypse Now again, and maybe even make it as well, but you'd couldn't replicate the relevance. In taking Conrad's novel and placing it in Vietnam the original was waking a direct commentary on the politics of the time. A remake would lose that, so what'd be the point?

I think it's less about the quality of the original, and more about a film fitting into a time and place. Psycho was a classic thriller, and the remake couldn't have been more faithful, it was shot for shot identical. But the end result was a thriller that time had left behind, while the original shocked it's audience in all the right places, the remake felt almost quaint against the cruelty and violence of modern thrillers.

But at the end of the day, who cares? No matter how good or bad a remake the original is still there for anyone who cares to watch it.

I think one could easily have remade Apoc Now and set it in Iraq, losing very little of the commentary in the process. You'd have somewhat different points, but you could arguably have a better movie.

.................. No if your going to do that its a different film ... i see nothing wrong with reusing old film ideas but call the film something different make sure its nothing to do with the old film
...the remade Flight of the Phoenix, would have worked better if they'd set it some where else ... hell, set it in space and have a nice science fiction film ...
...If some one was to remake Apocalypse Now and set it in Iraq, I'd like it to be some thing Jar head ... Some thing comparable but was a unique film

Tri wrote:.................. No if your going to do that its a different film ... i see nothing wrong with reusing old film ideas but call the film something different make sure its nothing to do with the old film
...the remade Flight of the Phoenix, would have worked better if they'd set it some where else ... hell, set it in space and have a nice science fiction film ...
...If some one was to remake Apocalypse Now and set it in Iraq, I'd like it to be some thing Jar head ... Some thing comparable but was a unique film

The space thing was done by Ron Howard(apollo 13). Seriously though I agree and like the idea of Flight of the Pheonix in space. Also agree about Apoc Now.

blades of glory and napoleon dynamyte

I'd say most musicals as many are timeless, sadly Rocky Horror is already being 'redone' and I'll be stunned if Grease isn't nabbed by someone shortly.

Others I'd think wouldn't work as they where of their time and any kind of rework might as well be named something else as they'd need to drop most of what made the originals funny or good movies include.

Any Carry on films
Ghostbusters
Alien or Aliens (yeah you can come up with a new story, but you can't have a different person playing Ripley in a remake.)
2001
Smokey and the Bandit
Cannonball Run

plus a few mentioned I agree with 100%

Seven Samurai
Star Wars (unless George CGI's the whole thing, does 7-9 on the end, and lets Han shoot first again.)
Blade Runner

It was Orsen Wells who said 'movies are never finished, they are abandoned."

So some of the remake mania is just returning to a cash cow but some (especially Lucas tinkering with his own work) is because they see it can be done better.

I have no problem with remaking Lord of the Rings, it will happen one day, in fact shortly after 2040 when the books go out of copyright.
While good adaptions there would be room for more of Tolkiens vision and less of Jacksons, byt the trime the clock runs down we will be able to make complete realistic films entirely out of CGI. I smell a true to script miniseries etc.

I dont count classic literature on not to be remade list, after all the core vision is the authors not the film-makers.

Top of the do not touch pile:

Forbidden Planet
Them!
Day the Earth Stood Still (oops)
Kind Hearts and Coronets
The Dam Busters (though remastering and upgrading the FX imagery would be encouraged)
Zulu
Tron
High Society
Some Like It Hot
Italian Job (oops)
Deer Hunter
Casablanc
2001



All of the above were films of their time and belong where they are.

Seven Samurai does not directly belong on the list, because while the film itself should never be remade the story is retold frequently to varied degrees of competency, which is in a very real way a complement.


I would like to see Metropolis refilmed, I think it would do the scope justice. Anything by Buster Keaton or Charlie Chaplin would need a special touch, not 'comic actors' like Will Ferrel or Martin Short please.

Orlanth wrote:

Seven Samurai does not directly belong on the list, because while the film itself should never be remade the story is retold frequently to varied degrees of competency, which is in a very real way a complement.

Indeed. The magnificent seven is a cracking example of a remake done right. A fistful of Dollars being another cracking re-imagining of a kurosawa remake.

The concepts of the Seven Samurai have been used plenty of times in other films. Look at the basic plots of both A Bugs life and The 3 Amigos.

As for films that shouldn't be touched, well I think as long as a remake can add something new to films vision or with some new relevance to the modern world then nothing should be off limits. Off course not all will succeed.

Lets not forget that The Thing, Invasion of the Bodysnatchers, Scarface, The Departed, Heat, Cape Fear and The Fly were all remakes and who wants to live in a world without those?

So:
Yojimbo (by Kurosawa)
-> A Fistfull of Dollars (w/ Eastwood)
-> Last Man Standing (w/ Willis)
-> ???

Please remember that there are only between thirty-six and seven essential plots in existence, so everything is reusable.

Seven Samurai and Yojimbo have spawned several straight lifts, Magnificent Seven being the most obvious, but ther ewas a seven samnurai plot set in ancient Rome and as a space opera that where rather more forgettable. All of course with seven heroes and few survivors.

Lawrence of Arabia
Cool Hand Luke

I doubt anyone would actually dare to try and remake Lawrence of Arabia, even though the subject matter is public domain.

I should make it clear that I am not completly against re-makes or "re-visions",I enjoyed Rob Zombies version of Halloween and also like the "new" Battlestar Galactica,and of course the current vision of Batman is very well done.
However,for the most part most re-makes,IMO,are simply crap,loads of CGI to dazzle the masses with little of the origanal films "texture of story telling".

Bedazzled... Oops.

Gerry. But not because they did such a great job that it can't be topped...