Give a good reason why you prefer the one you do.
2006-10-20 05:39:24 · 13 answers · asked by milky 4 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
Always the original. Never the remake-I don't like that some people try to make money from other peoples hard work and have no imagination of their own.
2006-10-20 06:42:29 · answer #1 · answered by dsignr25 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the movie. For example, while most original movies are better (ei. Caddyshack) I prefer some remakes to the original. For example, I think the remake to The Thomas Crown affair is much better than the original. By the same token, some people prefer the sequels to movies like Star Wars (ei. The Empire Strikes back) to the first installment.
2006-10-20 05:52:19 · answer #2 · answered by icarusvx 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Either A. or B. Usually the original because it's the first one, it's the most accurate to what the writer and director wanted to produce. I also enjoy remakes of really old movies, because I would have never known about them if it wasn't for the remake. Sequels usually aren't very good though. I don't think any sequel would make it to my favorites list.
2006-10-20 05:44:00 · answer #3 · answered by Famous Amos {not the cookies} 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The original is almost always the best. Some remakes can be decent, but rarely as good as the first. The only remake that I really liked better than the first was the remake of Cape Fear with Robert DeNiro
2006-10-20 05:58:49 · answer #4 · answered by The Trooper 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it all depends on the movie. For example, the Original Poseidon Adventure was much better than the new one, however the new Amithyville Horror definetly rocked over the old one. Sequels for the most part aren't as well done as originals, but there are exceptions like Godfather 2, Aliens, and of course T2- terminator 2
2006-10-20 05:47:26 · answer #5 · answered by witchyone 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I usually don't like sequels unless they were initially intended to be in a series, but there are some great remakes of classic stories that I absolutely love. No preference to any of your choices, it's all about the movie in the end.
2006-10-20 05:59:12 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A. Because that was how it was intended to be, the birth of a good idea. Remakes normally have other interpretations or updated ideas which don't give you the good feelings you have for the 1st one. Sequels are normally to cash in on the popularity of the 1st one or try to tie things up which may not be to everyone's liking.
2006-10-20 05:51:23 · answer #7 · answered by kryzz 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The devil's Rejects. It was a sequel to apartment of one thousand Corpses and the DR was a strategies state-of-the-artwork. pondering sequels are customarily worse than the universal i could upload that 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later are ineffective even of their extreme-high quality, storyline and scares. The appearing grew to become into as quickly as slightly bigger interior the 1st despite the fact that if I nevertheless bear in mind each video clips equivalent on a scores scale.
2016-11-24 19:56:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on wich story.
Sometimes the prequels are pretty good
The remake of the Omen was pretty sh*tty, but Texas Chainsaw Massacre was awesome
And on sequels, what about Saw 2, that movie was better than the first, and I can't waite to see Saw 3.
2006-10-20 05:48:32 · answer #9 · answered by danksprite420 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of what.? eg: The Godfather 2 was better than Godfather 1..so, it depends. Let me ask you why common sense is not so common?
2006-10-20 06:03:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋