asianxcore

pointless remakes of both The Birds and Strangers on a Train. boo.

Rogue588

Good.

While it might be true that no one's "forcing" us to watch these crappy remakes, unfortunately, it might indirectly affect us in the long run. Besides all the psychiatry bills from having our childhoods raped, think of the presedent these remakes are setting. Imagine where we'd be if the studios were this unoriginal back in the day. But hey, at least we could hope Paris Hilton gets it in a phone booth if she's not starring in 'the Hitcher'.

The same thing could be said about reality shows or contemporary music too. You might not be forced to listen to it, but it influences your choices. To try to casually brush it off by saying "If you don't like it, don't watch/listen" is ridiculous. Then again, complaining about it on an internet forum doesn't do much either..

RyoHazuki

Are you sure about that? As I recall, the remake added a bunch of crap to the story.

outer-edge

I read the story back in High School and actually prefered it more than the direction the movie took. So, while I typically do not agree with remakes, I would like to see something more true to the story.

Cameron

The Birds II: Land's End remember that...

worst thing that could happen is we get a new 2 disc birds SE with a commentary this time around....

again i say boo

Charlie Goose

Maybe they'll add a dream sequence where the birds sing hip-hop.

QuiGonJosh

Not really, they fleshed out the characters in the family and changed the dynamic of the family around some, but other than that it's pretty much a straightforward slasher picture. I look at it not as a remake, but just quasi -sequel/remake. The original is so much better of course, but I think the new one was a lot of fun, it worked for me.

Kudama

Hitchcock was great, admitted, but I never got into this particular film. It’s a little scarier than attack of the napkins or something.

I never could get my head around why none of these humans ever armored themselves or tried to even take a token swing at their attackers. Wrap a shirt around your face, grab a rake and go to town. It’s not like these things were condors with guns or something.

Birds haven’t done any significant evolving in the meantime, so I really don’t expect much from this one either. But if it gets some hungry special effects people work, good. Bay can have it.
Obviously my (very unpopular I’m betting) opinion, but there’s my disclaimer nonetheless.

For Hitchcock I’ll stick with Rope and Rear Window.

Rival11

Um, don't hit me...............I'm interested.

metaridley

I'm shocked that Bay would go this far to be unoriginal and lazy. He's completely lost any respect people should have for him at this point.

Normally, I try to see the other side of people's opinions, and I'm for discussing an upcoming movie rationally. But this time, uh, no.

Remaking (most) Hitchcock films is just completely wrong, and as a fan, I am pissed. I'm expecting Casablanca to get the next Bay treatment, starring Ben Affleck and involving several major special effects shots, including explosions.

RyoHazuki

Maybe not.....

Bay Backs Away From The Birds

Producer/director Michael Bay appeared to back away from reports that he was mulling a remake of Alfred Hitchcock's classic thriller film The Birds in comments to SCI FI Wire and other reporters on May 25. "I don't want to talk about The Birds, because that's so far down the line, and I have misgivings about even trying to even do that, you know what I'm saying?" Bay said at a news conference to promote his upcoming SF action film The Island.

Scarlett Johansson, Bay's Island star, was sitting next to him when she learned of the potential remake and reacted with shock. "You're remaking The Birds?" she asked with incredulity. "The one with Tippi Hedren?"

Bay responded: "You can't believe everything you read. It doesn't mean it's going to happen."

Last month, The Hollywood Reporter ran a story saying that Bay's Platinum Dunes production label was in talks to remake the 1963 thriller with producer Peter Guber, though his Mandalay Pictures banner. The new version would reportedly be based on the short story by Daphne du Maurier, to which Universal owns the rights and which inspired Hitchcock's original movie, the trade paper reported. (Universal is owned by NBC Universal, which also owns SCIFI.COM.)

At the news conference, Bay tried to change the subject to his upcoming Texas Chainsaw Massacre prequel, called The Origin, and a remake of The Hitcher when Johansson again registered her protest against remaking The Birds.

"You can't remake a Hitchcock movie!" Johansson said.

Bay again responded: "I know, it doesn't feel right. That's why you can't believe everything you read."

When Johansson seemed to realize that the interchange was being monitored by a roomful of reporters, she teased: "Yeah, look, now I'm going to be starring in it, and it's going to be some $180 million blockbuster."

"Yeah, it's a slippery slope when you do remakes," Bay said. "The movie I think that should never be remade is The Shining. I love Kubrick, and the scariest shot in any movie is that scene of the twins down at the end of the hallway." The Island opens July 22.

Hendrik

...really...?... after all, Hitchcock remade his own "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (1934) in 1956... and his "Dial M For Murder" was remade as "A Perfect Murder"...

. . . . . .

DRG

Michael Bay remakes a classic: "Unoriginal Hollywood bastards! Why don't they leave well alone!"

Peter Jackson remakes a classic: "Awesome! I can't wait!"

mikewendt

I've also read that Michael Bay's company is remaking Day Of The Dead.

There's no point in fighting them anymore... Remakes are usually made on lower budgets and are making huge box office bank. That's the bottom line, they won't stop. And honestly I've been enjoying most of them, so I give up.

brainee

They could do this remake with an all-black cast (mostly played by rappers) and call it "Birdz". (or to go a step further -- "Birdz in the Hood")

Cameron

I think a classic film, and a hitchcock film are different things. Not to say a remake is needed, but Kong has already been run into the ground with sequels and remakes....

Hitchcock remakes and sequels have never done well. he is to famous a face. I doubt most people on the street would know the names, much less the faces of Merian C. Cooper & Ernest B. Schoedsack. To me its like remaking a John Wayne movie. More than a classic film, and Icon of sorts.

Samuel

As long as Strange Brew is never remade I'm content.

dx23

In another colorful moment in Hollywood, from the IMDB.com:

http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2006-10-18/

Just what we need, Michael Bay producing a remake of a classic. I don't think that we are far off that Casablanca remake with J-Lo and Marc Anthony or the Wizard of Oz with Dakota Fanning, both directed by McG.

Filmmaker

Ain't that a bitch?

Charlie Goose

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=420084

chess

God no.

Bareit

Works for me.

Groucho

I'll say it: the first movie ain't that great. It takes forever to get to the bird attack, and when the attack does happen most of the effects are ridiculously laughable, even by 1963 standards. There are some great individual sequences, but overall the movie doesn't work for me.

Giles

and the ending was lame kind of like 'War of the Worlds'

FantasticVSDoom

Wow...This is going to go over like a turd in a punchbowl.