What is the worst horror remake? - DVDfile.com forum for DVD, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD

10-12-2001, 10:43 PM

This is for worst remake, not worst sequel. Keep that in mind if you post to this.

This is easy for me. The worst horror remake, and I may be alone in this view, is;

The Island of Dr. Moreau- Marlon Brando, Val Kilmir.

The original was WAY better than this. Check it out if you want sometime. Thanks!

------------------
My name is Johnny =W=

misfit13b · 10-12-2001, 11:15 PM

I'd have to go with Gus Van Sant's '98 Psycho remake.

This thing was horrid - and to top it off, that idiot Anne Heche had never even SEEN the original before signing on! I mean C'MON!

Completely insulting to the original.

[This message has been edited by misfit13b (edited 10-12-2001).]

Laughing Gravy · 10-12-2001, 11:40 PM

Whew. There's been so many awful horror remakes, I dunno where to start, except to second the votes for ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU (original: ISLAND OF LOST SOULS), and PSYCHO. The better the original, the worst the sequel appears to be. The second versions of INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and THE THING were both okay, I s'pose, but paled so much in comparison with the originals that they seemed like crap.

How about those "unofficial" remakes AIP released directly to TV in the mid 1960s, such as ZONTAR, THE THING FROM VENUS (IT CONQUERED THE WORLD) and THE EYE CREATURES (INVASION OF THE SAUCERMEN)?

And how 'bout HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL?

And any of the dreary remakes of THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA?

And KING KONG and GODZILLA (okay, technically not horror, but...)?

And CARNIVAL OF SOULS?

And NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD?

And any of those dreadful recent releases that try to avoid taking the blame by sticking the book's author in front of the title, e.g., MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN or BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA?

Filmmaker · 10-12-2001, 11:50 PM

Dude, that's so PSYCHO [1998]...there is no competition...

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

Filmmaker · 10-12-2001, 11:52 PM

Laughing Gravy, and I of course ask this lovingly, is there a single, solitary film remake of any genre that you would ever admit to preferring over the original...?

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

Obi-Wan · 10-13-2001, 12:13 AM

I have to agree with Filmmaker and misfit that psycho was the worst remake. That was one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

Disco Stu · 10-13-2001, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Filmmaker:
Laughing Gravy, and I of course ask this lovingly, is there a single, solitary film remake of any genre that you would ever admit to preferring over the original...?

Although you were asking Laughing Gravy, in my case I'd say my two favorite horror movies were both remakes mentioned previously, "The Thing" and "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." I can't say I really liked either of the originals, but I respect them, especially Body Snatchers, it's a shame that a lot of Siegel's political commentary was cut. The original "The Thing" is kind of hokey, especially because "it" looks like a carrot. The remake of "The Blob" is pretty good as well, as a junky scarefest anyway, and a little better than the campy original.

The remake of "House on Haunted Hill" was truly dreadful as was "The Haunting." "Island of Dr. Moreau" is incredibly ridiculous and has the trump card for the scene with Marlon Brando playing the piano with the midget.

------------------
Arrogance is bliss
I have better taste than you

storm117 · 10-13-2001, 01:00 AM

Hmmm, let's see here (tapping fingers on desk in antici....say it!......pation), it would most definately have to be The Mummy (1999). Let truth be told that this "box-office-sales-ploy-of-a-movie" cannot be compared to the awe inspiring 1932 Mummy with Boris Karlof as Imhotep.

Sorry, there is no argument in this. Don't go there. Please. I beg you. Don't.

Later,
Nathan

------------------
KSUPC: the sky is our playground
"...And once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, For there you have been and there you long to return..." Leonardo da Vinci

billyslits · 10-13-2001, 01:10 AM

I'd have to say "Body Snatchers" or whatever that Abel Ferrera "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" remake was called. Horrible, horrible film.

Also, I don't think the 2nd version of "Island of Dr. Moreau" was very good either. It starred Michael York (who already looks like a MANimal) and Burt Lancaster and it sucked ass. I love "Island of Lost Souls". Charles Laughton is so incredibly creepy in that film.

[This message has been edited by billyslits (edited 10-12-2001).]

Monterey Jack · 10-13-2001, 02:46 AM

Carpenter's version of The Thing was a masterpiece.

10-13-2001, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by billyslits:
I'd have to say "Body Snatchers" or whatever that Abel Ferrera "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" remake was called. Horrible, horrible film.

Also, I don't think the 2nd version of "Island of Dr. Moreau" was very good either. It starred Michael York (who already looks like a MANimal) and Burt Lancaster and it sucked ass. I love "Island of Lost Souls". Charles Laughton is so incredibly creepy in that film.

[This message has been edited by billyslits (edited 10-12-2001).]

Where are people coming up with Island of Lost Souls? The Island of Dr. Moreau with Michael York and Burt Lancaster... Isn't that the original movie? And if not, what is Island of Lost Souls? I can't believe you didn't like the Island of Dr. Moreau with York and Lancaster. I thought that the one with Brando and Kilmir was a remake of THAT original movie? Hmm.

------------------
My name is Johnny =W=

Laughing Gravy · 10-13-2001, 05:35 AM

M&C: The original version was made in 1932 and was entitled THE ISLAND OF LOST SOULS. Charles Laughton played Moreau, and Bela Lugosi was the head manimal ("What is the law? Are we not men?"). It's a masterpiece of horror and mood, with a truly chilling and exciting climax. Not available on DVD (naturally). It was a Paramount film, and the rights are currently owned by Universal.

Filmy: That's an easy one. THE FLY with Jeff Goldblum was superior in every way to the Vincent Price original (which I also liked). And inasmuch as the Karloff FRANKENSTEIN, the Lugosi DRACULA, and the March JEKYLL & HYDE weren't the first filmed versions of those three novels, I'd say those were pretty good "remakes" (well, okay, so technically DRACULA ain't so good).

As for other genres, well, the first title that springs to mind is SHOW BOAT; the 1936 version was a great deal better than the 1929 original (and the 1951 version).

Filmmaker · 10-13-2001, 12:30 PM

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:
Filmy: That's an easy one. THE FLY with Jeff Goldblum was superior in every way to the Vincent Price original (which I also liked).

Laffy: Well I'll be a sonuvabitch...at least I lived to read that...

As for other genres, well, the first title that springs to mind is SHOW BOAT; the 1936 version was a great deal better than the 1929 original (and the 1951 version).

Not exactly where I was shooting at with that question (as I'm sure you're all too aware) but fair enough...

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

Laughing Gravy · 10-13-2001, 01:08 PM

Filmy: Well, leaving your mom out of this, did I misunderstand the question? Weren't you asking me for a non-horror remake that I prefer to the original?

Remakes tend to be pale imitations; the best of 'em only remind you how good the originals were, which is usually why somebody wanted to remake 'em in the first place. Case in point: Working together on another film, Steven Spielberg and Richard Dreyfus discovered they shared a mutual love of the Spencer Tracy film A GUY NAMED JOE, and hatched up a plan to remake it. The result, ALWAYS, is terrible. How can two talented guys remake a film they love and do such a lousy job?

Beats me.

On the other hand, I liked the remakes of LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS and HERE COMES MR. JORDAN (HEAVEN CAN WAIT) a lot, if not as much as the originals...

Filmmaker · 10-13-2001, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:
did I misunderstand the question?

He feigns confusion...[chuckle]...

Okay, I'll bite...the subtext to my question was "are there any post-1960 remakes of any pre-1960 films that you prefer over the original?". Admittedly, I didn't specify that, so spare me the slap on the wrist--I thought it might be self-evident. If you are not being facetious about your confusion, then I'm truly surprised...

This all leads me to a greater question, one I've always wanted to know, but been reticent to ask--where does your desire for and enjoyment in posting at DVDFile stem from? Again, this question is asked seriously, but good-naturedly, with no intention of impugning your views (I know you're a big boy and can take it, but others may get their feathers ruffled if they misinterpret me as flaming you).

Let me clarify--your tastes in film are very cut and dried. For the most part, you either love it or detest it--I haven't seen much middle ground in your tastes. What's more, your tastes run to an almost fanatical level toward pre-1960s films. What confuses me is that, other than Sykes, who doesn't seem to post often enough to make it worthwhile for you, there aren't any other posters here who appear to have your same dedication to and exclusive love for films of this area. Why do you find worth in posting in an arena where the vast majority seems to spend their intellectual energies on films made over the last forty years? Again ('cuz you can never say it enough) this doesn't imply you're not welcome here--I'm just trying to get inside your head a little because I, for one, can't imagine wanting to post at a forum chock-a-block with hardcore fans of Wilder and Ford, Bogart and Cagney, and jumping in with "Screw THE MALTESE FALCON, how 'bout that PHANTOM MENACE!"...

P.S.--In regards to your A GUY NAMED JOE/ALWAYS issue, I can only offer that Spielberg and Dreyfuss approached the project from a feeling of love for the original (which, as graceful an emotion as it is, is not a logical one), and love is blind. Or, from another angle, Spielberg and Dreyfuss were so taken with the idea of whether or not they could update AGNJ, they didn't stop to think whether they should remake AGNJ (ironic, since that was the moral issue Spielberg assaulted in JURASSIC PARK)...

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

[This message has been edited by Filmmaker (edited 10-13-2001).]

Laughing Gravy · 10-13-2001, 05:26 PM

Well, Filmy, while the vast majority of posts around here are asinine (including mine), there's always the odd opinion or bit of information to be gleaned that illuminates me about something I didn't know, or didn't realize. As somebody who writes about films a lot, I also need to keep in touch with what is popular and what is going on in people's minds about what they see. I am also working with people who are releasing classic (and not so classic) movies on DVD, and future releases and promotional campaigns and whatnot can be skewered based on what you movie fans would like to see.

And hopefully, I can share my love and knowledge of older films, as in advising M&C about the 1932 ISLAND OF LOST SOULS, or the availability of Marx Brothers movies, certain vintage serials, etc. As for pre-1960, I would actually say that putting my tastes closer to pre-1972 films would be more accurate. I dunno what that is, but far fewer memorable or noteworthy films were released after that date than before it.

Sorry if I bother you, but that's why our names are posted with your comments; you can skip somebody who doesn't interest you!

Filmmaker · 10-13-2001, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:
Sorry if I bother you, but that's why our names are posted with your comments; you can skip somebody who doesn't interest you!

Ah, Laffy, your post was just going along great, telling me exactly what I was looking for in a clear and concise manner, then you had to go and task me at the very end...

You mean to tell me after posting:

this question is asked seriously, but good-naturedly

no intention of impugning your views

others may get their feathers ruffled if they misinterpret me as flaming you

Again ('cuz you can never say it enough) this doesn't imply you're not welcome here--I'm just trying to get inside your head a little

...you still think I'm bothered by you?! For the record, you do not bother me (well, except for those blue-moon moments when you go on a rather militant, multi-post "if it isn't old, it's crap!" tangent), rather you intrigue me...

Thanks for the insight, in any case...

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

Laughing Gravy · 10-13-2001, 09:19 PM

Well, gosh, I sure hope I don't bother you.

And I certainly don't think that (a) all old movies are good (I've seen more bad old movies than good ones) or that all new movies are crap (SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE crap? LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL crap?).

On the other hand, I tried to think up five movies that were post-1960 remakes that were better than the pre-1960 originals, and I couldn't do it.

Can you?

Filmmaker · 10-13-2001, 10:10 PM

I must be a fool for opening myself up to your distaste but, alas, here goes (adapting the question to reflect your stated preference of pre-1972 and post-1972):

BETTER DIRECT REMAKES:

RANSOM (1996) vs. RANSOM! (1956)

BATMAN (1989) vs. BATMAN: THE MOVIE (1966)

CAPE FEAR (1991) vs. CAPE FEAR (1962) [Not by a huge margin, mind you, but still...]

SHAFT (2000) vs. SHAFT (1971) [The original's narrative repeatedly grinds to a halt for sex scenes that do nothing to further the storyline--count me out]

SCARFACE (1983) vs. SCARFACE (1932) [Try to breathe, Laughing Gravy--in through the nose, out through the mouth...

]

John Carpenter's THE THING (1982) vs. THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD (1951) [Much more terrifying and visceral]

INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1978) vs. INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1956)

THE BLOB (1988) vs. THE BLOB (1958)

MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN (1994) vs. FRANKENSTEIN (1931) [probably not a popular choice, but it's my story and I'm stickin' to it]

THE FLY (1986) vs. THE FLY (1958)

BETTER INDIRECT REMAKES:

ALIEN (1979) vs. IT! THE TERROR FROM BEYOND SPACE (1958) [So much more frightening and visceral, it's almost comical to compare the two]

TITANIC (1997) vs. A NIGHT TO REMEMBER [All the veracity of ANTR's respect to historical fact, but with the human element added]

EQUAL QUALITY REMAKES:

THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK (1998) vs. all other THREE MUSKETEERS films

THE MASK OF ZORRO vs. all other ZORRO films

OUTLAND (1981) vs. HIGH NOON (1952) [Laughing Gravy! Laughing Gravy!!! Can you hear me? (Filmmaker waves his hand briskly over Laughing Gravy's face) Anyone have any smelling salts?]

SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE crap?

Maybe not crap, but a damn far cry from the quality level of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (yes, I'm still bitter)

LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL crap?

Well, not so much the second hour, but the first was serious schlock and the final scene of the film (the reunion of mother and son) was about the most cheesy, unabashedly Hallmark-card moment I've seen in recent film history...

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

[This message has been edited by Filmmaker (edited 10-13-2001).]

Soggy Bagel's Revenge! · 10-13-2001, 11:14 PM

While Jan de Bont's version of "The Haunting" was pretty atrocious, the title definitely has to go to Gus Van Sant's remake of "Psycho". Anyone see "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back", where Gus Van Sant just keeps counting his money while making "Good Will Hunting II"? I bet that's what Van Sant was doing the whole time he was filming "Psycho", becuase obviously he wasn't paying any attention to the actors. You'd have to be both blind and deaf to cast Anne Heche in anything.

thanx,
Brook

------------------
If you're a film fan in Colorado, be sure not to miss BLOODFEST!, my horror film festival benefiting Bonfils Blood Center. There are great films showing, so you should come! Get all the info here!

Go to the missing title art gallery for fun comics, creative writing, and original short films!
or, visit Cheap Thrills ...or more? for lots of horror cinema fun!
Also, see my ever-so-wonderful DVD collection!

Laughing Gravy · 10-14-2001, 02:23 AM

Filmmaker: Ignoring comparing crap with crap (such as BATMAN), you are wrong with every one of your comparisons so far as I've seen, with the possible exception of ALIEN/IT!, although the latter film is much more fun and I'd choose it over the former any day.

You are particularly full of howdy doody regarding SCARFACE and FRANKENSTEIN, and in fact your choices for the remakes tells me a lot about you. A lot. And as for SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, well...

Never mind. Anybody who'd opt for DeNiro's Monster over Karloff's can't be reasoned with.

dvds'r'us · 10-14-2001, 04:02 AM

Hmm. There Are A Few...

I Can't Say The Haunting 1998 Version Cuz I Haven't Seen The Original And I Actually Liked That Version.

So My Answer Would Be...

House On Haunted Hill 1998 Version

------------------
I'd Rather Be The Hunter Than Than The Hunted.

There's No Such Thing As Good And Evil, Only Weak And Strong.

Filmmaker · 10-14-2001, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:
you are wrong with every one of your comparisons so far as I've seen [and] your choices for the remakes tells me a lot about you. A lot. Never mind. Anybody who'd opt for DeNiro's Monster over Karloff's can't be reasoned with.

My faith in others' abilities to carry on a mature discussion, with an open mind for possibilities, ideas and tastes other than their own, has been challenged yet again...

I respect your tastes (though I don't share them) and I recognize your intellect, but I have no recourse but to pity your self-masturbatory tendencies and complete, utter lack of social grace.

Hmmm, I guess I was wrong--you do bother me. You bother the hell out of me (not that it would even occur to you in a feverish daze to care, I'm sure)...

------------------
Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part...

A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list!
...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

[This message has been edited by Filmmaker (edited 10-14-2001).]

SebastianCole · 10-16-2001, 01:50 AM

Com'n! The 1998 version of Psycho has some novelty value, and I agree the Carpenter version of The Thing was awesome.

The older version of House on Haunted Hill was horribly outdated.

I thought the remake was a hoot. Wasn't going to win any awards, but had it's moments.

------------------
"I realize many of you are angry over the change to pan and scan only. Especially those of you strapped with Dynamite."

My DVD collection

RBB · 10-16-2001, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:
...you are wrong with every one of your comparisons so far as I've seen.

...Never mind. Anybody who'd opt for DeNiro's Monster over Karloff's can't be reasoned with.

Don't pretend that you are interested in reason. Your proclamation that Filmmaker is flat out "wrong" in his comparisons is testament that you have no interest in carrying on reasonable discussion of opinions. While some of your posts can be insightful, it's pretty transparent that most are simply a vehicle for you to champion your rather narrow perspective on film.

And to the topic: While I couldn't appreciate the Psycho remake or the motivation behind it, either, I enjoyed hearing a better recording of Hermann's score. So, maybe it did serve some purpose.

Laughing Gravy · 10-16-2001, 06:57 PM

GOD DAMN IT.

I HATE it when people discover I'm not interested in reason.

Rogue · 10-16-2001, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:

And as for SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, well...

Never mind.

I, for one, want to know where that comment was going.

------------------
"Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."

RBB · 10-16-2001, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Laughing Gravy:
I HATE it when people discover I'm not interested in reason.

It's not like it's a big secret.

10-12-2001, 10:43 PM	#1 (permalink)
Mykel & Carli	What is the worst horror remake? This is for worst remake, not worst sequel. Keep that in mind if you post to this. This is easy for me. The worst horror remake, and I may be alone in this view, is; The Island of Dr. Moreau- Marlon Brando, Val Kilmir. The original was WAY better than this. Check it out if you want sometime. Thanks! ------------------ My name is Johnny =W=

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode

10-12-2001, 11:15 PM	#2 (permalink)
misfit13b Actor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: New England	I'd have to go with Gus Van Sant's '98 Psycho remake. This thing was horrid - and to top it off, that idiot Anne Heche had never even SEEN the original before signing on! I mean C'MON! Completely insulting to the original. [This message has been edited by misfit13b (edited 10-12-2001).]

10-12-2001, 11:40 PM	#3 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	Whew. There's been so many awful horror remakes, I dunno where to start, except to second the votes for ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU (original: ISLAND OF LOST SOULS), and PSYCHO. The better the original, the worst the sequel appears to be. The second versions of INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and THE THING were both okay, I s'pose, but paled so much in comparison with the originals that they seemed like crap. How about those "unofficial" remakes AIP released directly to TV in the mid 1960s, such as ZONTAR, THE THING FROM VENUS (IT CONQUERED THE WORLD) and THE EYE CREATURES (INVASION OF THE SAUCERMEN)? And how 'bout HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL? And any of the dreary remakes of THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA? And KING KONG and GODZILLA (okay, technically not horror, but...)? And CARNIVAL OF SOULS? And NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD? And any of those dreadful recent releases that try to avoid taking the blame by sticking the book's author in front of the title, e.g., MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN or BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA?

10-12-2001, 11:50 PM	#4 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	Dude, that's so PSYCHO [1998]...there is no competition... ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

10-12-2001, 11:52 PM	#5 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	Laughing Gravy, and I of course ask this lovingly, is there a single, solitary film remake of any genre that you would ever admit to preferring over the original...? ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

10-13-2001, 12:13 AM	#6 (permalink)
Obi-Wan Actor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: San Diego, Ca	I have to agree with Filmmaker and misfit that psycho was the worst remake. That was one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

10-13-2001, 01:00 AM	#8 (permalink)
storm117 Actor Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Interzone.	Hmmm, let's see here (tapping fingers on desk in antici....say it!......pation), it would most definately have to be The Mummy (1999). Let truth be told that this "box-office-sales-ploy-of-a-movie" cannot be compared to the awe inspiring 1932 Mummy with Boris Karlof as Imhotep. Sorry, there is no argument in this. Don't go there. Please. I beg you. Don't. Later, Nathan ------------------ KSUPC: the sky is our playground "...And once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, For there you have been and there you long to return..." Leonardo da Vinci

10-13-2001, 01:10 AM	#9 (permalink)
billyslits Actor Join Date: Jun 2001	I'd have to say "Body Snatchers" or whatever that Abel Ferrera "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" remake was called. Horrible, horrible film. Also, I don't think the 2nd version of "Island of Dr. Moreau" was very good either. It starred Michael York (who already looks like a MANimal) and Burt Lancaster and it sucked ass. I love "Island of Lost Souls". Charles Laughton is so incredibly creepy in that film. [This message has been edited by billyslits (edited 10-12-2001).]

10-13-2001, 02:46 AM	#10 (permalink)
Monterey Jack Wants to be John Smith Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Walpole, MA U.S.A.	Carpenter's version of The Thing was a masterpiece.

10-13-2001, 05:35 AM	#12 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	M&C: The original version was made in 1932 and was entitled THE ISLAND OF LOST SOULS. Charles Laughton played Moreau, and Bela Lugosi was the head manimal ("What is the law? Are we not men?"). It's a masterpiece of horror and mood, with a truly chilling and exciting climax. Not available on DVD (naturally). It was a Paramount film, and the rights are currently owned by Universal. Filmy: That's an easy one. THE FLY with Jeff Goldblum was superior in every way to the Vincent Price original (which I also liked). And inasmuch as the Karloff FRANKENSTEIN, the Lugosi DRACULA, and the March JEKYLL & HYDE weren't the first filmed versions of those three novels, I'd say those were pretty good "remakes" (well, okay, so technically DRACULA ain't so good). As for other genres, well, the first title that springs to mind is SHOW BOAT; the 1936 version was a great deal better than the 1929 original (and the 1951 version).

10-13-2001, 12:30 PM	#13 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	Originally posted by Laughing Gravy: Filmy: That's an easy one. THE FLY with Jeff Goldblum was superior in every way to the Vincent Price original (which I also liked). Laffy: Well I'll be a sonuvabitch...at least I lived to read that... As for other genres, well, the first title that springs to mind is SHOW BOAT; the 1936 version was a great deal better than the 1929 original (and the 1951 version). Not exactly where I was shooting at with that question (as I'm sure you're all too aware) but fair enough... ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

10-13-2001, 01:08 PM	#14 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	Filmy: Well, leaving your mom out of this, did I misunderstand the question? Weren't you asking me for a non-horror remake that I prefer to the original? Remakes tend to be pale imitations; the best of 'em only remind you how good the originals were, which is usually why somebody wanted to remake 'em in the first place. Case in point: Working together on another film, Steven Spielberg and Richard Dreyfus discovered they shared a mutual love of the Spencer Tracy film A GUY NAMED JOE, and hatched up a plan to remake it. The result, ALWAYS, is terrible. How can two talented guys remake a film they love and do such a lousy job? Beats me. On the other hand, I liked the remakes of LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS and HERE COMES MR. JORDAN (HEAVEN CAN WAIT) a lot, if not as much as the originals...

10-13-2001, 03:32 PM	#15 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	Originally posted by Laughing Gravy: did I misunderstand the question? He feigns confusion...[chuckle]... Okay, I'll bite...the subtext to my question was "are there any post-1960 remakes of any pre-1960 films that you prefer over the original?". Admittedly, I didn't specify that, so spare me the slap on the wrist--I thought it might be self-evident. If you are not being facetious about your confusion, then I'm truly surprised... This all leads me to a greater question, one I've always wanted to know, but been reticent to ask--where does your desire for and enjoyment in posting at DVDFile stem from? Again, this question is asked seriously, but good-naturedly, with no intention of impugning your views (I know you're a big boy and can take it, but others may get their feathers ruffled if they misinterpret me as flaming you). Let me clarify--your tastes in film are very cut and dried. For the most part, you either love it or detest it--I haven't seen much middle ground in your tastes. What's more, your tastes run to an almost fanatical level toward pre-1960s films. What confuses me is that, other than Sykes, who doesn't seem to post often enough to make it worthwhile for you, there aren't any other posters here who appear to have your same dedication to and exclusive love for films of this area. Why do you find worth in posting in an arena where the vast majority seems to spend their intellectual energies on films made over the last forty years? Again ('cuz you can never say it enough) this doesn't imply you're not welcome here--I'm just trying to get inside your head a little because I, for one, can't imagine wanting to post at a forum chock-a-block with hardcore fans of Wilder and Ford, Bogart and Cagney, and jumping in with "Screw THE MALTESE FALCON, how 'bout that PHANTOM MENACE!"... P.S.--In regards to your A GUY NAMED JOE/ALWAYS issue, I can only offer that Spielberg and Dreyfuss approached the project from a feeling of love for the original (which, as graceful an emotion as it is, is not a logical one), and love is blind. Or, from another angle, Spielberg and Dreyfuss were so taken with the idea of whether or not they could update AGNJ, they didn't stop to think whether they should remake AGNJ (ironic, since that was the moral issue Spielberg assaulted in JURASSIC PARK)... ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list! [This message has been edited by Filmmaker (edited 10-13-2001).]

10-13-2001, 05:26 PM	#16 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	Well, Filmy, while the vast majority of posts around here are asinine (including mine), there's always the odd opinion or bit of information to be gleaned that illuminates me about something I didn't know, or didn't realize. As somebody who writes about films a lot, I also need to keep in touch with what is popular and what is going on in people's minds about what they see. I am also working with people who are releasing classic (and not so classic) movies on DVD, and future releases and promotional campaigns and whatnot can be skewered based on what you movie fans would like to see. And hopefully, I can share my love and knowledge of older films, as in advising M&C about the 1932 ISLAND OF LOST SOULS, or the availability of Marx Brothers movies, certain vintage serials, etc. As for pre-1960, I would actually say that putting my tastes closer to pre-1972 films would be more accurate. I dunno what that is, but far fewer memorable or noteworthy films were released after that date than before it. Sorry if I bother you, but that's why our names are posted with your comments; you can skip somebody who doesn't interest you!

10-13-2001, 05:54 PM	#17 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	Originally posted by Laughing Gravy: Sorry if I bother you, but that's why our names are posted with your comments; you can skip somebody who doesn't interest you! Ah, Laffy, your post was just going along great, telling me exactly what I was looking for in a clear and concise manner, then you had to go and task me at the very end... You mean to tell me after posting: this question is asked seriously, but good-naturedly no intention of impugning your views others may get their feathers ruffled if they misinterpret me as flaming you Again ('cuz you can never say it enough) this doesn't imply you're not welcome here--I'm just trying to get inside your head a little ...you still think I'm bothered by you?! For the record, you do not bother me (well, except for those blue-moon moments when you go on a rather militant, multi-post "if it isn't old, it's crap!" tangent), rather you intrigue me... Thanks for the insight, in any case... ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list!

10-13-2001, 09:19 PM	#18 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	Well, gosh, I sure hope I don't bother you. And I certainly don't think that (a) all old movies are good (I've seen more bad old movies than good ones) or that all new movies are crap (SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE crap? LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL crap?). On the other hand, I tried to think up five movies that were post-1960 remakes that were better than the pre-1960 originals, and I couldn't do it. Can you?

10-13-2001, 10:10 PM	#19 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	I must be a fool for opening myself up to your distaste but, alas, here goes (adapting the question to reflect your stated preference of pre-1972 and post-1972): BETTER DIRECT REMAKES: RANSOM (1996) vs. RANSOM! (1956) BATMAN (1989) vs. BATMAN: THE MOVIE (1966) CAPE FEAR (1991) vs. CAPE FEAR (1962) [Not by a huge margin, mind you, but still...] SHAFT (2000) vs. SHAFT (1971) [The original's narrative repeatedly grinds to a halt for sex scenes that do nothing to further the storyline--count me out] SCARFACE (1983) vs. SCARFACE (1932) [Try to breathe, Laughing Gravy--in through the nose, out through the mouth... ] John Carpenter's THE THING (1982) vs. THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD (1951) [Much more terrifying and visceral] INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1978) vs. INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1956) THE BLOB (1988) vs. THE BLOB (1958) MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN (1994) vs. FRANKENSTEIN (1931) [probably not a popular choice, but it's my story and I'm stickin' to it] THE FLY (1986) vs. THE FLY (1958) BETTER INDIRECT REMAKES: ALIEN (1979) vs. IT! THE TERROR FROM BEYOND SPACE (1958) [So much more frightening and visceral, it's almost comical to compare the two] TITANIC (1997) vs. A NIGHT TO REMEMBER [All the veracity of ANTR's respect to historical fact, but with the human element added] EQUAL QUALITY REMAKES: THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK (1998) vs. all other THREE MUSKETEERS films THE MASK OF ZORRO vs. all other ZORRO films OUTLAND (1981) vs. HIGH NOON (1952) [Laughing Gravy! Laughing Gravy!!! Can you hear me? (Filmmaker waves his hand briskly over Laughing Gravy's face) Anyone have any smelling salts?] SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE crap? Maybe not crap, but a damn far cry from the quality level of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (yes, I'm still bitter) LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL crap? Well, not so much the second hour, but the first was serious schlock and the final scene of the film (the reunion of mother and son) was about the most cheesy, unabashedly Hallmark-card moment I've seen in recent film history... ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list! [This message has been edited by Filmmaker (edited 10-13-2001).]

10-13-2001, 11:14 PM	#20 (permalink)
Soggy Bagel's Revenge! Actor Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Denver, Colorado	While Jan de Bont's version of "The Haunting" was pretty atrocious, the title definitely has to go to Gus Van Sant's remake of "Psycho". Anyone see "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back", where Gus Van Sant just keeps counting his money while making "Good Will Hunting II"? I bet that's what Van Sant was doing the whole time he was filming "Psycho", becuase obviously he wasn't paying any attention to the actors. You'd have to be both blind and deaf to cast Anne Heche in anything. thanx, Brook ------------------ If you're a film fan in Colorado, be sure not to miss BLOODFEST!, my horror film festival benefiting Bonfils Blood Center. There are great films showing, so you should come! Get all the info here! Go to the missing title art gallery for fun comics, creative writing, and original short films! or, visit Cheap Thrills ...or more? for lots of horror cinema fun! Also, see my ever-so-wonderful DVD collection!

10-14-2001, 02:23 AM	#21 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	Filmmaker: Ignoring comparing crap with crap (such as BATMAN), you are wrong with every one of your comparisons so far as I've seen, with the possible exception of ALIEN/IT!, although the latter film is much more fun and I'd choose it over the former any day. You are particularly full of howdy doody regarding SCARFACE and FRANKENSTEIN, and in fact your choices for the remakes tells me a lot about you. A lot. And as for SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, well... Never mind. Anybody who'd opt for DeNiro's Monster over Karloff's can't be reasoned with.

10-14-2001, 04:02 AM	#22 (permalink)
dvds'r'us Actor Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: St. Louis Area	Hmm. There Are A Few... I Can't Say The Haunting 1998 Version Cuz I Haven't Seen The Original And I Actually Liked That Version. So My Answer Would Be... House On Haunted Hill 1998 Version ------------------ I'd Rather Be The Hunter Than Than The Hunted. There's No Such Thing As Good And Evil, Only Weak And Strong.

10-14-2001, 02:02 PM	#23 (permalink)
Filmmaker Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite	Originally posted by Laughing Gravy: you are wrong with every one of your comparisons so far as I've seen [and] your choices for the remakes tells me a lot about you. A lot. Never mind. Anybody who'd opt for DeNiro's Monster over Karloff's can't be reasoned with. My faith in others' abilities to carry on a mature discussion, with an open mind for possibilities, ideas and tastes other than their own, has been challenged yet again... I respect your tastes (though I don't share them) and I recognize your intellect, but I have no recourse but to pity your self-masturbatory tendencies and complete, utter lack of social grace. Hmmm, I guess I was wrong--you do bother me. You bother the hell out of me (not that it would even occur to you in a feverish daze to care, I'm sure)... ------------------ Ernest Hemingway once wrote, "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part... A curious mix of the best and worst in motion picture entertainment--that's right, it's Filmmaker's DVDTracker list! ...and the fun doesn't stop there--check out how the madness all began with Filmmaker's LaserDisc Tracker list! [This message has been edited by Filmmaker (edited 10-14-2001).]

10-16-2001, 01:50 AM	#24 (permalink)
SebastianCole Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Eden Prairie, Mn	Com'n! The 1998 version of Psycho has some novelty value, and I agree the Carpenter version of The Thing was awesome. The older version of House on Haunted Hill was horribly outdated. I thought the remake was a hoot. Wasn't going to win any awards, but had it's moments. ------------------ "I realize many of you are angry over the change to pan and scan only. Especially those of you strapped with Dynamite." My DVD collection

10-16-2001, 06:57 PM	#26 (permalink)
Laughing Gravy Actor Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sacramento, California USA	GOD DAMN IT. I HATE it when people discover I'm not interested in reason.