A Snake Eating Tale
I don't know what it is (okay, I suspect that it's the captivity of Hollywood to Wall Street money these days -- which leads to risk-averse studios who embrace retreads/remakes as what they consider a "safe" win for them) -- but OMG do they overdo it with the remakes.
It's like the cinematic snake eating its own tail, and it drives me bananas when done poorly and/or lazily. I think the capital costs of movie-making are so great that studios have been actively embracing rehashed efforts in hopes of a certain win.
The net result is boring, lackluster "entertainment" that fails to accomplish what the originals accomplished, using big money to bring big talent and snappy special effects to sell old stories.
As a movie lover, I'm always like "Please make NEW movies! The world needs new stories, not endless junky remakes!"
The stagnation of it is palpable, and I think it's rooted in that aforementioned risk aversion plaguing Hollywood. Commerce is prevailing over art, and the result is more blah than blockbuster.
Some movies that should never be remade (but probably will be someday, given how remake-rapacious Hollywood is) are:
BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA -- absolutely should never be remade, but may be at risk of it.
THE PARALLAX VIEW -- this one could not and should not be remade.
RAVENOUS -- likely safe from the risk of remake because it undeservedly flopped upon release, but it should definitely never be remade.
AMERICAN PSYCHO -- no way should this one be remade.
AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON -- again, a singular classic of the genre, should never be remade.
MAY -- another one that should never be remade. It's perfect as it is!
MULHOLLAND DRIVE (or, for that matter, any David Lynch movies -- I don't think anyone would actually risk doing that, but just in case)
An exception to my general hostility to remakes was THE INVISIBLE MAN (2020) -- that one did it right, in that they took an old Universal Monster(tm) and spun it into a new story that changed both the focus and the nature of the monster into something that was refreshingly innovative.
I suppose I don't object to remakes if the remake adds something new and interesting to an otherwise moribund franchise. It's just that I see ones that are simply retreads without adding anything new and interesting to it.
THE INVISIBLE MAN remake is a rare case of a remake done right, creating a genuinely harrowing movie. I'd even throw HOLLOW MAN (2000) into that category, and to lesser success -- but Verhoeven delivered a good faith remake with that one that kept to the scary aspects of invisibility.
In that vein, another decent remake, that in many ways exceeded the original, was THE FLY (1986). That was a case of a remake that took advantage of the gap in time between original and remake to deliver a genuinely original remake.
Another one I'd have to include would be THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1978) -- again, it was a remake that delivered. It didn't upstage the original, but offered its own contributions to that story.
But I still think Hollywood (and movie fans) are better served by more original works than a pile of remakes. Remakes can be done well, if enough care and attention is used on them, but I think the majority of them are just cowardly cash grabs by listless and lazy studios who don't want to take the chance on originality.
It's like the cinematic snake eating its own tail, and it drives me bananas when done poorly and/or lazily. I think the capital costs of movie-making are so great that studios have been actively embracing rehashed efforts in hopes of a certain win.
The net result is boring, lackluster "entertainment" that fails to accomplish what the originals accomplished, using big money to bring big talent and snappy special effects to sell old stories.
As a movie lover, I'm always like "Please make NEW movies! The world needs new stories, not endless junky remakes!"
The stagnation of it is palpable, and I think it's rooted in that aforementioned risk aversion plaguing Hollywood. Commerce is prevailing over art, and the result is more blah than blockbuster.
Some movies that should never be remade (but probably will be someday, given how remake-rapacious Hollywood is) are:
BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA -- absolutely should never be remade, but may be at risk of it.
THE PARALLAX VIEW -- this one could not and should not be remade.
RAVENOUS -- likely safe from the risk of remake because it undeservedly flopped upon release, but it should definitely never be remade.
AMERICAN PSYCHO -- no way should this one be remade.
AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON -- again, a singular classic of the genre, should never be remade.
MAY -- another one that should never be remade. It's perfect as it is!
MULHOLLAND DRIVE (or, for that matter, any David Lynch movies -- I don't think anyone would actually risk doing that, but just in case)
An exception to my general hostility to remakes was THE INVISIBLE MAN (2020) -- that one did it right, in that they took an old Universal Monster(tm) and spun it into a new story that changed both the focus and the nature of the monster into something that was refreshingly innovative.
I suppose I don't object to remakes if the remake adds something new and interesting to an otherwise moribund franchise. It's just that I see ones that are simply retreads without adding anything new and interesting to it.
THE INVISIBLE MAN remake is a rare case of a remake done right, creating a genuinely harrowing movie. I'd even throw HOLLOW MAN (2000) into that category, and to lesser success -- but Verhoeven delivered a good faith remake with that one that kept to the scary aspects of invisibility.
In that vein, another decent remake, that in many ways exceeded the original, was THE FLY (1986). That was a case of a remake that took advantage of the gap in time between original and remake to deliver a genuinely original remake.
Another one I'd have to include would be THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1978) -- again, it was a remake that delivered. It didn't upstage the original, but offered its own contributions to that story.
But I still think Hollywood (and movie fans) are better served by more original works than a pile of remakes. Remakes can be done well, if enough care and attention is used on them, but I think the majority of them are just cowardly cash grabs by listless and lazy studios who don't want to take the chance on originality.
No comments have been added yet.
