Movie Challenge Part 9: If it ain't broke...FIX IT ANYWAY!

[Groucho]

What is Groucho’s Movie Challenge? Its mission is simple: let us all, as a forum, work to seek out films that might otherwise slip our radar. Each week, a new challenge will be posted. Anybody who wants to participate will see a film within the guidelines, and return back to the forum to report on the film they saw. It’s easy, it’s fun, and everybody can participate. It’s not a trivia contest…it’s not a game…it’s merely a way we can all be exposed to new avenues of film appreciation…or at the very least see a good flick or two.

I'm happy to return as host after a two-week hiatus. Thanks to $tarr and Rypro 525 for picking up the slack.

Part 9: If it ain't broke...FIX IT ANYWAY

This week’s challenge: watch a remake of a movie you love. Remake qualifies as any story that has been filmed before. Your choices could range from a shot-by-shot remake using the same script ((Psycho 1960 ---> Psycho 1998) to very loose remakes (Casablaca ---> Barb Wire).

As always, try and watch a film you have never seen before. Advanced viewers may consider an alternate challenge (originally suggested by wendersfan): watch two movies, one a remake of the other.

Watch your film(s) whenever you have the time, and come back here to report…whether your experience was positive or negative.

Missed a previous version of the Movie Challenge? It’s never to late to play:

Part 1: Old Movies
Part 2: Foreign Films
Part 3: Silence is Golden
Part 4: The Truth is Stranger
Part 5: IMDB Top 250
Part 6: Unfamiliar Genres
Part 7: Martial Arts Films
Part 8: Watch a movie you didn't originally like

[Giles]

cool challenge! a Val Lewton retrospect is about to begin at the AFI, so I'm gonna catch Cat People and rent the 80's remake.

[Rypro 525]

might watch "the virgin spring" since the remake is "last house on the left".

[Damfino]

Even though there are some good remakes, I might rent something horrid like the Psycho remake just so that I can write a negative review.

EDIT: I just received a copy of the original Ladykillers in the mail, so if I have time, I might watch this and go see the Cohen brothers version.

[drjay]

I finished an actual triple this week... I'd seen Reservoir Dogs and City on Fire, the movie it was loosely based on, and this week I got a chance to see Kaante which is actually a melding of Reservoir Dogs and The Usual Suspects. Pretty good Bollywood flick, although there was a little too much Michael Bay-esque stylized camera movement, but I thought it was decent, and as one of my first Bollywood movies, I'd say it's a nice intro into the whole scene (it's shot in LA w/ some American characters, and like I mentioned, the shots/editing are very Westernized).

[chente]

I now have an excuse to watch Last Man Standing.

Hell, I may finally do the Yojimbo, A Fistful of Dollars, Last Man Standing Marathon I've been threatening for years.

[MrN]

I just started watching The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial but I don't know if its really considered a remake.

My other candidate is probably The Killers, since conveniently both films are on one DVD release...

[littlefuzzy]

Is there a good way to find a list of remakes?

[Groucho]

Originally posted by littlefuzzy
Is there a good way to find a list of remakes?

You could do a search over at IMDB using "REMAKE" as a keyword, and narrow it down as needed.

[karnblack]

Originally posted by MrN
My other candidate is probably The Killers, since conveniently both films are on one DVD release...

This sounds like a good idea.

I was also thinking of watching Wages of Fear and Sorcerer.

Must we have seen the original? Or, can we watch both for the first time?

Also, it seems like I've seen more remakes than originals. Could we possibly watch the original of a remake we love, or is that for another challenge?

[littlefuzzy]

I decided to do this challenge in two THREE ways, watch a remake, watch the original version, and watch both: I am picking up two tapes from the library: Frank Capra's Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936) as the original version of Adam Sandler's Mr. Deeds; and Doctor Dolittle with Eddy Murphy, since I have always enjoyed the original Doctor Dolittle with Rex Harrison.

Edit: Aww heck, lets go with all three ways. I will also get BOTH of The Nutty Professor films, and watch them, as well (Jerry Lewis and Eddie Murphy.)

[JasonF]

I went lowbrow this week and watched Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes, and man did that movie stink! Somehow, Burton managed to make a film that seemed about half an hour too long and seemed like about an hour's worth of important scenes had been left on the cutting room floor. Stay very, very, very far from this movie.

I also saw Pitch Black, which was more or less a remake of Alien. It's a fun popcorn movie.

I also watched Almost Famous again. It's not a remake, but it's such a charming movie I felt like mentioning it.

[Damfino]

Psycho (1998)

Director: Gus Van Sant (Drugstore Cowboy, My Own Private Idaho, Goodwill Hunting)

Cast:
Anne Heche (Wag the Dog)
Vince Vaughn (Swingers)
Julianne Moore (Far From Heaven)
Viggo Mortensen (Lord of the Rings)

Gus Van Sant defended this project by claiming that most younger movie goers won't watch black & white movies (note to Groucho: possible challenge idea!), so why not do a shot for shot remake of this Alfred Hitchcock classic? A better question is why? Remakes are seldom better than the originals, but they will usually offer something different for fans to compare. This movie offers fans almost nothing.

Yes, I said almost nothing. I did find a few things I liked in this movie. 1. Van Sant hired a Hitchcock lookalike to recreate the original Psycho cameo of the master standing on the sidewalk outside the real estate office and Van Sant himself shares the sidewalk with the double. 2. The film is dedicated to Hitchcock (This is a hollow, but appropriate gesture. 3. Patricia Hitchcock (Hitchcock's daughter) actually approved of this remake! 4. The kitchen knife is credited to John Woo.

Now for the bad. Vince Vaughn is fatally miscast as Norman Bates and he sleepwalks thru the movie almost as if he's just reciting his lines for a read-thru. One scene in particular in the original features Anthony Perkins acting nervous and flustered when questioned by the private investigator. Vaughn simply recited his lines during this scene and it totally lacks the impact of Perkins' performance. Also, Anne Heche delivers a rather skanky performance as Marion Crane and doesn't warrant the same sympathy from the audience as Janet Leigh.

Nitpick: Inflation demanded an increase from the $40,000 that was stolen by Crane in the original to $400,000 in the remake. But to keep the size of the bundle consistent in the remake, she steals $400,000 in $1,000 dollar bills! ($1,000 bills are no longer in circulation and are prized collector's items and are each worth a lot more than $1,000 on the collectors market). Not only that, but these bills are in mint condition which might not be impossible but certainly unlikely. Yet nothing is said when she pays $4,000 for a used car in $1,000 bills.

Gus Van Sant has made some great movies in the past (see above) and hopefully he will again.

[MrN]

I watched The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial, an Altman film he made for TV. I guess for budgetary reasons they concentrated on just the trial. While I thought it was interesting it just can't match the original's acting talent. While staying with the trial makes you automatically on the watch for misleading truths or outright lies, there never are any. I can definately see the Altman touch in the directing but since its a trial he never really gets to do a lot of over lapping dialogue. So, finally, I thought it was an interesting experiment but it just isn't good as the original.


Suggestion for a future challenge: A variation on the foreign-language challenge - watch a film from a country (or made in a language) that you've never watched a film from. That should be hard for even the people who watch a lot of foreign-films.

[karnblack]

I watched three versions of Ernest Hemmingway's The Killers:

The Killers (1946) Feature Film Directed by Robert Siodmak

I really enjoyed this film. It reeks of Noir which is a good thing. It starts a little slow, but I think it follows Hemmingway's story in the beginning. (This is just judging from watching this version and Tarkovsky's student film which are very similar in the beginning.) The plot has many twists and and there are a lot of flashbacks to help explain what happened and why. Overall I give this film a thumbs-up.

The Killers (1964) Made for TV Movie Directed by Don Siegel

This movie jumps right into the action. There is no opening dialog scene in the diner. My roommate enjoyed this version more since in his words "there seemed to be less places that dragged." I thought the remake was very different although it kept the same basic plot, and I enjoyed it as much as the original. Overall I give this film a thumbs-up.

The Killers (195?) Student Film Directed Andrei Tarkovsky

This film is only 19 minutes in length so it does not contain a lot of the content of the other films. I need to read or listen to Hemmingway's short story, but I think this film follows it very closely. The opening is very similar to Siodmak's film, but the dialog is in Russian with English subtitles. After watching the first two movies this one seems cut short. Overall I think this film is a good student film worth watching.

[Rypro 525]

might do the double feature and watch both Abre los Ojos (aka "open your eyes") and Vanilla sky

[Giles]

Originally posted by karnblack


The Killers (195?) Student Film Directed Andrei Tarkovsky

This film is only 19 minutes in length so it does not contain a lot of the content of the other films. I need to read or listen to Hemmingway's short story, but I think this film follows it very closely. The opening is very similar to Siodmak's film, but the dialog is in Russian with English subtitles. After watching the first two movies this one seems cut short. Overall I think this film is a good student film worth watching.

where did you see this? VHS? DVD? In terms of Tarkovsky's student films, Turner Classic Movies showed his "The Steamroller and the Violin" late last Friday night along with the docu "One Day in the Life of Andrei Arsenevich" and "The Mirror"

[Goldberg74]

Okay... for me its The Magnificent Seven and A Bug's Life... then I'll go out and rent/buy The Seven Samuri, which I have never seen before.

[MrN]

Giles, the Tarkovsky Killers short in included on the Criterion DVD, with the other two films.

[littlefuzzy]

I wanted to watch a remake of a film I liked, watch the original version of a remake I had seen, and watch the original and remake of yet a third film.

Today, I watched The Nutty Professor with Jerry Lewis, and followed it up with the Eddie Murphy version.
The Eddie Murphy version really paled in comparison to the original.

I also picked up Frank Capra's Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, as the original version of Adam Sandler's Mr. Deeds, which I saw recently in the theater. I have never seen the original.

For the remake portion, I was going to go with Eddie Murphy's Dr. Dolittle, but my library didn't have it after all, so I ordered Freaky Friday with Jamie Lee Curtis, as I have seen the original before.

[NavinJohnson]

I also went through Criterion's The Killers set. I liked the '64 version, but I really prefer the '46. I think the only real 'weak' part of The Killers (1964) was Ronald Reagan as a bad guy; he just doesn't look convincing.

[karnblack]

Originally posted by NavinJohnson
I also went through Criterion's The Killers set. I liked the '64 version, but I really prefer the '46. I think the only real 'weak' part of The Killers (1964) was Ronald Reagan as a bad guy; he just doesn't look convincing.

My roommate and I both laughed when Ronald Reagan first appeared. There's just something wrong with him looking through binoculars.

[littlefuzzy]

I just watched Frank Capra's Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, and found it to be a fun film, culminating in a trial reminiscent of Miracle on 34th Street. Now that I have seen the original, Adam Sandler's version, while entertaining, wasn't as good.

I still have to watch the new Freaky Friday for my interpretation of this week's challenge.

[Giles]

thank god for Turner Classic Movies channel:

back to back showing of Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) and House of Wax (1953) - and what a comparison. While I had seen "House of Wax" before - in 3D nonetheless (80's reissue). The differences were startling. The Vincent Price version is more horror than the first one and as a result is superior to it's 1933 version. "Mystery" reflects the period of Warner Bros. when the noir-thrillers were common place - lighting and shadows are very prevailent. The film's tone though is inconsistent and seems to jump around into different genres (comedy, thriller, horror) causing it to be very disjointed. The strong headed lead female reporter (whose character is thankfully removed from the 1953 version) get a little grating and her final corny scene made me roll my eyes in my head. The 1953 remake even retains some of the exact same props used in the 1933 production - talk about not throwing anything away. I am very interested in seeing how the 2004 second remake from Warner's will compare to the latter two - however the thought of Paris Hilton starring in it, make me cringe.

[littlefuzzy]

I just watched Freaky Friday with Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan, having seen the original some years back.

This version of the film was OK, although parts of it seemed forced, especially when they are trying to show "This is really a 40 year old woman in a teenager's body" and vice versa.

I really can't compare the two films though, as it has been so long since I saw the original (or maybe I only read the book, I can't remember.)