Have you ever seen a re-make of a classic film that was as good as the original?

Question

Or even better?

Answer 1

wow, how old are we, im guessing around 30? past that magic age where new things are cool. Talking down the pub, about fraggle rock, thundercats, and the good old days..

Well just remember, its people like you, who have killed tv, continually demanding, and watching repeats. Oh i love dads army, but its playing every minute of every day, somewhere in the world, probably many times.

Remakes, make christmas slightly more bearable for some, eg bond - dont bother trying to tell me they are all different.....

New stuff is generally better than old stuff, its just not aimed at you, its aimed at punk kids, on lsd, with a mobile grafted to their face.

Now to answer, no, not really, tho the special effects are better, and the occasional one liner, is delivered with more zeal (because we now know thats this one line made the entire move famous for 30 years, so yeah the new guy gets a 5 minute paning heard shot with half a million in fireworks errupting behind him), and they have surround.

Heres how it goes, same damn plot, same damn film, if the book hasnt changed, theyve spent the money, on fireworks, and a well known front man......

Im nearly 30, I dont have a tv, i dont watch many films
try listening to www.bbc.co.uk/radio
launch the player, and you get hours of original comedy.

I just wish i didnt really like all the special effects, and surround sound, if more people saw these new films, in black and white, on a 15 inch screen, coming through a mono speaker, i think they might prefer the originals

Answer 2

The Fly. And agree on Oceans 11. If a remake is actually good we forget its a remake. And for a remake to be good there has to be something wrong with the original, that's why stuff like the Psycho remake, which is actually pretty good in its own right, is still lame.

And I don't believe someone said the Italian Job. The original is an absolute classic and the remake is a formulaic generic storyless special effects fest! And the Poseidon remake was a pile of crap too - it had no plot at all!

Answer 3

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was fantastic, mostly because it didn't TRY to be a remake. It was what it was, and nothing more. Johnny Depp didn't go around in a curly blonde wig, and the Oompa Loompas didn't have green hair or orange faces. It was a totally new movie and a remake all at once. Sure, Johnny Depp didn't replace gene Wilder, and Freddie Highmore didn't replace Peter Ostrum. They didn't try to. There was Gen Wilder and there was Johnny Depp. There was Peter Ostrum and there was Freddie Highmore. They were almost different characters, and that's how it should have been.

Answer 4

i admire classic horror videos - no longer the type the place the scares consist in easy terms of issues designed to make you bounce or countless gore. The Innocents replace into fairly reliable (unique) as you in no way knew if the horror replace into authentic or if the nanny replace into in simple terms mad. The movie that left me the main creeped out replace into 28 days later - I have been given extremely scared on each and every occasion I heard the sound of working footsteps for a protracted time afterwards.

Answer 5

The Italian Job - the first one had a load of old blokes (Benny Hil??). the second one had Jason Statham.

Oceans 11 - the first one had a load of old blokes (Frank Sinatra??), the second one had Matt Damon, Brad Pitt and George clooney.

King Kong- The first one had.. well a big monkey as did the second one but at least it was in colour. ( i despise black and white films)

And i have to agree with the girl above that said Titanic- the first one was sad and depressing, but in the second one Leonardo Dicaprio sinks, i've never seen such a feelgood movie. Also the only time i've ever been kicked out of a cinema for cheering. Left me with a warm and fuzzy feeling for weeks did that film.

Answer 6

Silk Stockings (1957) starring Fred Astaire and Cyd Sharisse was a remake of Ninotchka (1939) starring Greta Garbo, and the later film was much better.

Answer 7

The only one i can think of would be The Wizard of Oz. The original was black and white and silent. It was still a good movie but in the Judy Garland version, the music certainly adds to the movie. Also colour adds to the image of the movie as well.

Most others tend to be very poor imitations of the original.

Answer 8

pesonally i think king kong is brilliant much better than the original apart form a slow start once it gets going i loved it i know i was not even here when the first one was made but saw it a few times over the years but the remake i still like seeing it saw it twice with my son in the pictures oh and before forget the hills have eyes new one much more scary than the old one

Answer 9

The new Solaris was kind of cool- but a totally different film than the original. The Manchurian Candidate wasn't so bad either. Otherwise, not so much.

Answer 10

I preferred the Jeff Bridges King Kong over the original.