Whenever I hear complaints about a new remake coming out I wonder what if the 1977 Halloween classic movie (90%) was released today in our modern times for the first time, would it be considered boring or even unoriginal. I know this is an impossible task peppered with oxymoron’s considering everyone says this movie paved the way to the modern horror movie. But I do find it interesting to think about. It helps me understand what makes a horror movie good, the story itself or the technical style it’s presented in. After all, Halloween is a supremely basic story told very well.
I think a lot of the disdain of remakes may come from, and I’m paraphrasing a lot of reviewers out there, “the onslaught of unoriginal remakes”. First of all, remakes are predominantly connected to the horror genre. Why is this? Two reasons. You can only have something or someone stalking and killing innocent people so many times, so you might as well attach it to a well known already successful movie title. Secondly, it’s cheap to make horror movies because you can higher cheap young talent. Horror movies aren’t made to win Oscars, they exist to entertain at a lower level and make a quick profit. So, from a marketing point of view, it works.
Remakes are not made to replace the original. Take the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre(89%) for example. When I was younger, I touted it the scariest movie I ever saw and I meant it. There is just something scary about being chased through the woods by a huge guy with a chainsaw to me. The rustic, grainy feel only enhances the whole “snuff film” feel to it. I like the remake of Texas Chainsaw (35%). It carved some of the original story down and gave a bare bones story of stumbling into a bad place and just trying to get out of it. It left out the original silly dinner scene with the headache inducing screaming which was a plus. Although I don’t particularly need the added gore, I do like the swifter pacing and the use of heavy acoustic music to create a brooding sense of doom. I still enjoy the original on its own merits but the 2003 version is more my speed.
I think a lot of the disdain of remakes may come from, and I’m paraphrasing a lot of reviewers out there, “the onslaught of unoriginal remakes”. First of all, remakes are predominantly connected to the horror genre. Why is this? Two reasons. You can only have something or someone stalking and killing innocent people so many times, so you might as well attach it to a well known already successful movie title. Secondly, it’s cheap to make horror movies because you can higher cheap young talent. Horror movies aren’t made to win Oscars, they exist to entertain at a lower level and make a quick profit. So, from a marketing point of view, it works.
Remakes are not made to replace the original. Take the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre(89%) for example. When I was younger, I touted it the scariest movie I ever saw and I meant it. There is just something scary about being chased through the woods by a huge guy with a chainsaw to me. The rustic, grainy feel only enhances the whole “snuff film” feel to it. I like the remake of Texas Chainsaw (35%). It carved some of the original story down and gave a bare bones story of stumbling into a bad place and just trying to get out of it. It left out the original silly dinner scene with the headache inducing screaming which was a plus. Although I don’t particularly need the added gore, I do like the swifter pacing and the use of heavy acoustic music to create a brooding sense of doom. I still enjoy the original on its own merits but the 2003 version is more my speed.
The 2004 Dawn of the Dead remake (77%) is also very good. It may not have the social commentary of the original (97%) but it takes the source material uses it as the meat and potatoes in its visceral narration. Also, it took out some of the cheeky xylophone music and comical fumbling zombie moments and took them more seriously. I believe there is nothing wrong with taking an older, original and successful premise and tweaking it to fit in modern day fears and attention spans. It’s just too bad that some-to-most of these remakes fall into the wrong directors hands.
No comments:
Post a Comment