| Author | Message | ||
     Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
http://www.horror-movies.ca/2011/08/clive-barker-new-hellraiser-movie/ Trailer included. | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 92.5.34.191 |
I am so sick of this kind of thing. No wonder Barker has disowned it. Okay, I haven't seen it yet, but when will Hollywood get new and original, rather than simply dusting off all the old classics and giving them the 'teens in peril' treatment? Seriously, how many of these recent remakes have been any good? I can think of one, THE HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL - but in that case the original was a dog, and even then the remake was botched by a Disney-esque ending. The remakes of THE HAUNTING and THE WICKER MAN didn't even understand the source material and were subsequent catastrophes. The remakes of THE AMITYVILLE HORROR and NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET were cartoon versions. The remakes of PSYCHO and THE OMEN were scene-for-scene retreads of the originals and ultimately pointless. The remakes of THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE and HALLOWEEN went off along irrelevant tangents in an effort to be at least a bit different - and failed. Have I missed any? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
Hills have Eyes was pretty good Dawn of the dead was very good Day of the Dead was teens in peril trash complete with a vegetarian lovesick zombie that saved the leads at the end... I thought the Crazies was pretty good | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
A remake that returns to a book or play in order to try and do a better job than the first film is justifiable. A cash-in remake of a film that was only ever a film is utterly pointless. Why not just make a new film? The remake of Dawn of the Dead was good but it was largely a new film, deserving that extra push to cut its ties with the original and stand on its own. The remake culture will continue to usurp the audience for classic (and not so classic) films, denying them distribution and even recognition, while also shutting original films out of the market, until audiences organise a mass boycott of them. Horror fandom is a good place to start. T-shirts with classic horror film images and the caption 'You can stick your remakes where the projector don't shine' could be the fan fashion item of the decade. Let's do it. | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 92.5.34.191 |
I liked the HILLS and DAWN remakes, though the original former was trash cinema in my book and not difficult to better (I'm sure the mother cannibal was an extra from WILD WOMEN OF WONGO), while the remake of the latter was much more action-oriented, which made it more of a spectacle. I preferred the original version of THE CRAZIES. I thought the remake ran out of steam, and wasn't as good as its trailer promised. I await the remake of THE WOMAN IN BLACK with interest as that trailer looks very good too. I don't know whether you can really call it a remake, as a cinematic version has never been done before, but I found both the stage and TV incarnations very spooky. It has big shoes to fill (and I really want it to do well because I love period horror, a cause which wasn't advanced much by THE WOLFMAN). | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 92.5.34.191 |
Nice idea, Joel. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
And as for the spinning out of every successful film into a multi-source franchise, diluting whatever was new and interesting into generic corporate product... Barker's robust comment is refreshing, but unless fandom organise an effective boycott of this product its profits will readily absorb the negative publicity. If you spread salmon paste too thin it becomes tuna. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 166.216.226.53 |
Paul - I did love BLACK CHRISTMAS, a superior remake (as remake,I mean) - what did you think of that one? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
Then there was the remake of the Stepfather - that bombed so completely that even if I'd wanted to waste my time on it I wouldn't have been able to... Depending on wheter you call it a remake or a belated part III - Piranha 3d was great great fun (except for grumpy git Zed) Rob Zombie also remade Halloween II which is apparently even worse than his remake of the original... The addest thing is, my nice (20 years old) recons that the original Halloween is dead boring and tame but the remake is excellent... Then there're all rthe remakes of european and Japanese films which normally miss the mark by a country mile. Let Me In was actually surprisingly good though. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
*saddest | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
You didn't correct 'nice'. Because you don't want to go down in history as the man who corrected 'nice'. | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 92.5.34.191 |
Chris ... BLACK CHRISTMAS is part of that small group of horror movie remakes that I try to avoid watching at any cost because I object on principle to them ever having been submitted to celluloid. There aren't too many in there if I'm honest, though most of the ones I mentioned earlier were included and I ended up watching them all (to my immense self-loathing). While I don't think the original BLACK CHRISTMAS was by any means a classic (I guess it would seem very 'TV movie' by today's standards), I found it quite satisfying at the time. I seem to recall Margot Kidder did a cute impersonation of her real self as she was back then - i.e. a drunken saucepot - while the maniac, who only existed as a disembodied voice, was exceptionally creepy. However, if you recommend the remake, I will watch it. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
The original BLACK CHRISTMAS is a film I go back to at least once a year (guess when). Its restraint, sympathy for its cast, and general bleakness make it one of my very favourite 70s horror films. As such, I don't think I'll ever watch the remake, which looks about as generic as they come. I'm not entirely against remakes, but as Joel says above you either have to go back to the source material (where it exists) or work on a film which was perhaps a poor realisation of a good idea in the first place. The problem with most horror remakes these days is that all the original is to them is a brand name, and that brand name then becomes a list of ingredients to tick off (Set in Texas? Tick! Includes Chain Saw? Tick! Massacring involved? Tick! It's not a good way to make movies. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.131.61.19 |
Paul - the Black Xmas remake is awful. I think there's a review by me on here of it. In fact here it is to save you looking: Saw the remake of Bob Clark's seminal seventies slasher last night. Rubbish. Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish. A 24 carat waste of time. It's a pale imitation of the original, with whatever depth and style Clark's film had ripped out to be replaced with, well, nothing really. No suspense, interchangeable characters that are so vapid you can't even dislike them, a backstory that should be repellently awful but in fact is just dull, boring death scenes and, on the DVD, a choice of four different endings which just goes to show how clueless and indecisive those involved in this production were. Rushed, pointless, and weighing in at 75 minutes without the end titles this is hardly a film at all. In fact the biggest shock the film has to offer is that it was made by the same chaps who made FINAL DESTINATION & some of the best X-Files episodes. File under 'crap' and then go and file your nails or something equally more worth doing that wasting your time watching this. But back to this Hellraiser pic - it's another sequel rather than a remake I think - and produced by the line producer of Nightmare on Elm Street 2 (yes I know but I can't help what stays in my head). Doubtless as much of a waste of time as the previous 4? sequels. Remakes / Updatings I have liked include: House On Haunted Hill - right with you there Paul. It's pretty bloody good until that awful ending, and the music's superb. Dawn of the Dead - I prefer it to the original Piranha 3D - Ignore Mr McMahon, this is what we want, with even more blood nudity and other drive-in fun than the original Rob Zombie's Halloween II is also very interesting if you ignore its pedigree - I actually quite liked it, and I certainly thought it was better than his first 'remake'. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.131.198 |
What about the remake of the one about the miner who goes round killing people with a pickaxe... It was remade recently in 3d and I can't for the life of me think what you call it... | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
My Bloody Valentine? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.131.198 |
Yes - I think that's the one... Did anyone here see that? | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
I saw it. Painless enough, if a little po-faced. It did at least use 3D as it should be used, i.e. as a fun gimmick. Never seen the original My Bloody Valentine, so I can't say how it compares. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 2.24.5.150 |
More nuanced use of reverb and weirder vocals, but nothing with the pure adrenaline rush of 'You Made Me Realise'. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Joel - Kevin Shield's child is alive and well. Check out Roller Skate Skinny, I think that's their name, from the Shield's household. (A very good friend of mine, the bass player from our defunct band - except for this Friday for my stag-do - knows Mr. Shield's sibling quite well. Great band). | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
Wow, opinions vary here. But I wonder if this lament over remakes, is misdirected? Because how does a remake touch or affect the original in any way? It's the same argument the far-right sometimes makes against gay marriage, claiming its very existence will mar the integrity of heterosexual marriage. Patently absurd. I think what's being lamented by proxy here, is the fact that when "Hollywood" does make a horror movie, it always seems to be a remake. We're lamenting the lack of original horror films coming out of Hollywood. But why take them out on remakes vis-a-vis the originals? Like adaptations of literary works, they're two distinct objects of critical attention. To confuse a given work with its source material, might be the ample and accidental subject of exuberant delight or excessive disappointment; but shouldn't really in the end be THE source and basis of its intrinsic value.... | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
And come on, John - aren't you being a little hard on the remake of BLACK CHRISTMAS? I'm not saying it's another SHINING, but I found the whole visually - er, what's the right word - piquant? And anyway, it sure entertained me! | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Craig - I think the real complaint it not necessarily the remake (except in circumstances of the original being so good it shouldn't be touched), but rather the amount of remakes. Hollywood was remaking popular and critically lauded films way back in the 1930's, but today it seems that remakes of films are more proliferate than original films. I think that's the main gripe. I could be wrong. But that's my take on things. I agree with some, not all, of the films Weber mentions as being quite decent, if not in the case of the Dawn of the Dead remake, being even better than the original. Personally, exempting the last film I just mentioned above, I prefer remakes to be actual somebody else's take on a novel or short story. Case in point, Carpenter's vision of Who Goes There. Thing From Another World is a great film, but Carpenter's film is sublime. But remakes of a film over the source material has always bothered me. I think it's a case of films, even low budget ones transcending their predecessors in terms of skill and ability that makes them so attractive. Otherwise, great to look at, but inevitably with some, shallow exercises in technique. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
Frank, I think Hollywood's one overriding concern is: making money. And so, fear will necessarily rule in what decisions it makes about what films to greenlight. And so, remakes and sequels and literary properties and true stories and bio-pics and historical pieces - they're always going to get precedence over original material, for one reason: the assumption of a built-in audience. Which I think is as mythical as the "key demographic" they'll wave around, and other canards. The problem in life is that the supporting arguments to mythical assertions, are sometimes more formidable than the blank statement of provable facts: a well-supported lie often feels more right, than a foundation-less truth. Case in point: two of the top most profitable Hollywood films of all-time, are the horror anti-films THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT and PARANORMAL ACTIVITY. But did/does that change anything?... | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Craig - I completely understand that point of view. I even agree to some extent. But I don't condone it. But yes, pertinent points indeed. Mind you, I will always go out on a limb for The Blair Witch Project for many reasons. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
I might be alone on this, but I honestly see The Blair Witch Project as one of the very few examples of what I consider film-making to about.I'm very grateful it was a horror film.Unfortunately, as Halloween did, so has it spawned its various offspring's.I have no time for Paranormal Activity. I found it dull, uninspiring and simply flat.The same accusations some people aimed at The Blair Witch Project. Sorry, gone off topic again. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
What happened to the spaces between my sentences? Eh? | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
What happened to the spaces between my sentences?... That has an awfully Lovecraftian ring to it... and in the context of a discussion on PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, the spaces between your sentences have been erased... methinks you have awakened awful things with your chiding, Frank....  | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Oh MY GOD...what happened to the spaces...which sounds like a plaintive lament for a band from the 80's.  | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.186.67.114 |
Paranormal Activity had its moments, but I just got the impression that the director knew fuck all about the genre, that his "moments" were chanced upon haphazardly rather than crafted by a master. I mean, who in-the-know would put in a such a crummy seance scene? Hilarious. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.186.67.114 |
Insidious was made by folk who understood horror, but who should have been restrained from excess. Blair Witch was great - just the right of material and knowing what to do with it. | ||
| Mbfg (Mbfg) Username: Mbfg Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 92.4.167.221 |
I know I'm a bit late here but the Donald Sutherland-starring late 1970s remake of "The Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is equal in all respects to the original, and its ending is much, much better. Two different films, each with its own strengths. That is what a remake should be. I'm afraid I hate teen or twenty-something picked off one-by-one films, remake or original. After a few minutes I'm ready to offer the psycho a sub-machine gun to just get on with it. I agree with the point that few film makers have any idea what horror is about. Cheers Terry | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 49.227.37.53 |
Let us hope they never attempt to remake DON'T LOOK NOW. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
Sorry Ally.... http://www.movieweb.com/news/dont-look-now-remake-in-the-works | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 49.227.37.53 |
Nooooooo! Tell them to stop! That is the very last straw. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.216.135 |
""The original was very atmospheric, so we'll provide a little more of the narrative that audiences expect," he added." wtf IS HE ON ABOUT? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.216.135 |
Damn Caps Lock | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.216.135 |
Luckily the donkey-tromboner Michael Bay's remake of the Birds seems to be delayed almost permanently | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
Indeed, it seems the film's all fowled up. As to the remake, rumor is Rob Zombie's doing it. He's putting in a prologue where we see the dwarf's family life growing up. (... see, the joke there lies in what he did with his execrable HALLOWEEN... oh never mind) | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 49.227.152.58 |
"The original was very atmospheric, so we'll provide a little more of the narrative that audiences expect," he added." Which means we'll redo it putting in explanations for those too thick to follow it or appreciate mystery. | ||
| Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey) Username: Ramsey Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 92.8.18.2 |
Terry, I take it you mean the coda to the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers - that is, after "You're next"? Siegel actually meant to end with "You're next" on the freeway, I believe, but the framing story was imposed by the producer. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 2.24.30.60 |
"The original was very atmospheric, so we'll provide a little more of the narrative that audiences expect," he added." He'll have trouble doing that while picking up his teeth with broken fingers. To put this into a literary perspective: how many of us would like to see their favourite novels rewritten by hacks to "provide a little more of the narrative that readers expect"? Of course it harms the original films. It denies them distribution and sales, it confuses and dilutes their reputation, it reduces them to to competing with their own imitations. When I was younger, most of the films I saw in the cinemas were old films. That barely happens these days. The cinemas just show remakes instead. For a new generation, the remakes have largely superseded the originals. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.186.67.114 |
Well, don't look now or at any time. | ||
| Mbfg (Mbfg) Username: Mbfg Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 92.4.176.194 |
Ramsey, yes. If the original had been left with the freeway scene as its ending it would have been perfect. Perhaps we should all start re-writing books. I mean, what really drove the murderer in Poe's classic to kill and bury his victim's heart under the floorboards, a psychological trauma in his childhood, no doubt of it. I've never thought that story was complete, and it doesn't have a happy ending for God's sake, how could Poe have not given us a happy ending? And where's the romantic interest people? No, it needs to be re-set in modern day New York where Brad, an successful handsome but lonely advertising executive (probably with a cutesy kid or two who love their daddy sooo much) has just landed his company their biggest contract ever. The kid's childminder, Lucille, is also unbelievably good looking and unbelievably shy and sweet and lonely but somehow, she and Brad just don't realise that they are deeply in love. Brad's father, alcoholic of course and a loser, despises his son's success because he himself was a cop who crossed the line and was thrown out of the force. Unbelievably he feels that he's a failure... Thn Brad comes home one night to find his father dead, and Lucille kidnapped, along with the kids. The ransom note says that Brad has got to pretend his Dad's still alive and impersonate the odl bastard to get into his bank account where all the ex-cop's bribe money's been stashed(Brad is, of course, a perfect mimic and impressionist who makes his cutesy kids and Lucille die with laughter with his amazing imersonations). First though, he has to get rid of his dad's body. And where better than... Cheers Terry | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 92.5.34.191 |
Send that pitch to Hollywood, Terry. Don't bother addressing to anyone in particular, just send it. You'll be quids in by the end of the week. So long as you don't mind them re-titling it: WHAT'S THROBBING UNDER THERE? From the classic story by HP Lovecraft | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.156.186.45 |
Just watching the US version of Funny Games. While Naomi Watts doesn't quite carry the same gravitas as the star of the original, and the boy sounds more whiny (not his fault, the American accent turns whiny very easily - especially with kids) and is almost irritating in the first few minutes of the film, this is still a distinctly unsettling and uncomfortable film to watch. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.156.186.45 |
Spoilers - the US version seems to have greatly trimmed the most distressing scene in Funny Games. the scene where the boy has just been shot (incidentally, despite being a bit too whingy in the very early section he proved himself a very good actor in the scene when he made a run for it.) and the mother cries in her corner of the room was gone, replaced by Naomi Watts trying to escape straight off. Also, I'm not sure if it's because the version on film 4 the other night is pan and scanned, the composition of the shots doesn't seem up to Haneke's usual standards. |