Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Old 03-19-13, 12:56 PM
  #26  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Draven View Post
It's been around since the beginnings of the film industry. You should be used to it by now.
Except back in the day, remakes happened because a director or producer wanted to revisit the property, or had a fresh take on the idea.

Today, Hollywood is run by business majors who are proud of the fact that they never read and know nothing about filmmaking. The live by the credo that the product is irrelevant, and sales and marketing are everything. Thus, we get reboots and remakes because of branding. It doesn't matter if the original film was popular, or if the new film is any good. Marketing a known commodity is easier than selling something completely new, and if the film does turn out to be a hit they can leverage that bitch out to merchandising, where the real money is.
Old 03-19-13, 01:25 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,306
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Double_Oh_7 View Post
Yes. You're confusing reboots and remakes.
What's the difference?

I mean I guess I understand that a reboot means that you're like rebooting a franchise and starting over. Nolan's first Batman was a reboot in that it took an old franchise and rebooted it and created an entirely new franchise. I don't understand how it's not also a remake though. Burton's first Batman showed us how Bruce Wayne became Batman and the subsequent movies, set in the same universe, showed us more adventures of that Batman. Nolan's first Batman also showed us how Bruce Wayne became Batman and his subsequent movies, set in the same universe, also showed us more adventures of that Batman.
Old 03-19-13, 01:37 PM
  #28  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Actually Batman just showed what triggered him to be Batman. Batman Begins actually shows you the whole transformation. Literally showing you Wayne becoming Batman. Also that film didn't have all the connected backstory with the Joker, didn't have him in there either aside from the mention at the end. Along with a lot of other stuff.
Old 03-19-13, 01:39 PM
  #29  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by whoopdido View Post
What's the difference?

I mean I guess I understand that a reboot means that you're like rebooting a franchise and starting over. Nolan's first Batman was a reboot in that it took an old franchise and rebooted it and created an entirely new franchise. I don't understand how it's not also a remake though. Burton's first Batman showed us how Bruce Wayne became Batman and the subsequent movies, set in the same universe, showed us more adventures of that Batman. Nolan's first Batman also showed us how Bruce Wayne became Batman and his subsequent movies, set in the same universe, also showed us more adventures of that Batman.
A "reboot," "re-imagining," and a "re-adaptation" are all subsets of remake.

A remake quite simply is making a film based upon a source (play, comic book, novel) for a second, third, etc time.

The reasoning behind the subsequent adaptation ("remake") is merely descriptive of the type of remake it may be. For example, the Coen Bros' True Grit was a remake that was truer to the source. Gus van Sant's remake of Psycho was an experiment to truly remake a film by using the original film's same script and shooting shot sequence. The experiment failed...you cannot xerox a film, too many human elements apparently (actors, etc).

A reboot is a franchise-specific form of remake. In many ways the initial reboot film is a remake in that it is adapting to screen the "property" (Batman, Superman, etc) that was already adapted to screen. Here, "property" operates in the same way, the novel True Grit would in the Coen Bros. example. What makes this one so odd is that in the world of comic books, you do not have to be adapting the same literary source since comic books themselves generally "reboot" the same properties over and over. So, it is almost exclusive to comic book franchises where the basis of a remake can be the "property," but different literary source.

I think this is the best way to view remakes, reboots, reimaginings, etc. With "remake" being the broad umbrella term and the other terms and descriptions either being qualifiers or subsets of the broader "Remake."
Old 03-19-13, 02:08 PM
  #30  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
fumanstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 55,349
Received 25 Likes on 13 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Tarantino View Post
at Snake.

How can you sit there with a straight face and tell me Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, a nearly shot for shot remake, is not a remake, just because they were based on a book?

Anyway, I'm not bothered by remakes, I just don't see many of them.
It's not a remake.
Old 03-19-13, 03:20 PM
  #31  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,311
Received 463 Likes on 329 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by BambooLounge View Post
A "reboot," "re-imagining," and a "re-adaptation" are all subsets of remake.

A remake quite simply is making a film based upon a source (play, comic book, novel) for a second, third, etc time.

The reasoning behind the subsequent adaptation ("remake") is merely descriptive of the type of remake it may be. For example, the Coen Bros' True Grit was a remake that was truer to the source. Gus van Sant's remake of Psycho was an experiment to truly remake a film by using the original film's same script and shooting shot sequence. The experiment failed...you cannot xerox a film, too many human elements apparently (actors, etc).

A reboot is a franchise-specific form of remake. In many ways the initial reboot film is a remake in that it is adapting to screen the "property" (Batman, Superman, etc) that was already adapted to screen. Here, "property" operates in the same way, the novel True Grit would in the Coen Bros. example. What makes this one so odd is that in the world of comic books, you do not have to be adapting the same literary source since comic books themselves generally "reboot" the same properties over and over. So, it is almost exclusive to comic book franchises where the basis of a remake can be the "property," but different literary source.

I think this is the best way to view remakes, reboots, reimaginings, etc. With "remake" being the broad umbrella term and the other terms and descriptions either being qualifiers or subsets of the broader "Remake."
+1 all this.
Old 03-19-13, 03:26 PM
  #32  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,311
Received 463 Likes on 329 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Preterite View Post
Except back in the day, remakes happened because a director or producer wanted to revisit the property, or had a fresh take on the idea.
This isn't true.

When film introduced sound, a lot of older films got remade simply because they could use sound in them now. Back before TV, movie studios would remake popular films just a few years after the original, because there was no way to see the original anymore, and the studios felt that trotting out the old version wouldn't sell as well. So remakes have always existed as a money-making scheme for studios.

This isn't to say that directors/producers may have wanted to revisit a property for artistic reasons as well, but there was never a "purer" age where remakes were always artistically justified.
Old 03-19-13, 03:27 PM
  #33  
DVD Talk Hero
 
PhantomStranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Phantom Zone
Posts: 25,970
Received 552 Likes on 476 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

The trend will only worsen as the budgets rise in Hollywood. Producers are looking for proven concepts and stories they know will work with audiences, which is why new material rarely is the basis for summer blockbusters these days.
Old 03-19-13, 03:36 PM
  #34  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by PhantomStranger View Post
The trend will only worsen as the budgets rise in Hollywood. Producers are looking for proven concepts and stories they know will work with audiences, which is why new material rarely is the basis for summer blockbusters these days.
I think it would be interesting to take a look at the top 5 budgeted films of each decade. I have a feeling that regardless of decade, the top 5 budgeted films will have quite a few similarities.

Hollywood is a for-profit industry and the heads of studios tend to bet bigger only if they think their profit will be bigger. Off the top of my head without knowing budget statistics, I feel like a lot of the older Roadshow films with huge budgets (adjusted for inflation) were sword and sandal epics. For a period, the Bible/Ancient Rome was basically used the way studios use comic books now.

Or big budget musicals, or big budget explosion laden action flicks in the 80s.

Now, the intelligence, competence, and quality of the biggest budget films from decade to decade is certainly something to debate (I think that is where the downward trend truly lies), but I think thematic similarities between mega-budget films might simply be a hallmark of the business model of Hollywood.
Old 03-19-13, 05:33 PM
  #35  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Ash Ketchum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,342
Received 180 Likes on 138 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by BambooLounge View Post
I think it would be interesting to take a look at the top 5 budgeted films of each decade. I have a feeling that regardless of decade, the top 5 budgeted films will have quite a few similarities.

Hollywood is a for-profit industry and the heads of studios tend to bet bigger only if they think their profit will be bigger. Off the top of my head without knowing budget statistics, I feel like a lot of the older Roadshow films with huge budgets (adjusted for inflation) were sword and sandal epics. For a period, the Bible/Ancient Rome was basically used the way studios use comic books now.

Or big budget musicals, or big budget explosion laden action flicks in the 80s.

Now, the intelligence, competence, and quality of the biggest budget films from decade to decade is certainly something to debate (I think that is where the downward trend truly lies), but I think thematic similarities between mega-budget films might simply be a hallmark of the business model of Hollywood.
"Sword and Sandal" refers to low-budget Italian Hercules-style movies. Not quite the same thing as the Biblical and Roman epics like SAMSON AND DELILAH (1949), QUO VADIS (1951), THE ROBE (1953), THE TEN COMMANDMENTS (1956), BEN-HUR (1959), SPARTACUS (1960) and CLEOPATRA (1963), which were the huge-budgeted films of their day. CLEOPATRA nearly bankrupted 20th Century Fox because of its budget, even though it was a top-grossing film of its year. THE SOUND OF MUSIC saved the studio two years later.
Old 03-19-13, 05:41 PM
  #36  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

^Thanks for pointing that out. I had been grouping them all under that umbrella for a couple of years now. I probably should have looked up the "Sword and Sandal" phrase at some point, but never realized it was akin to "Spaghetti Western."
Old 03-19-13, 06:41 PM
  #37  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Raleighwood
Posts: 6,643
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by BambooLounge View Post
I think it would be interesting to take a look at the top 5 budgeted films of each decade. I have a feeling that regardless of decade, the top 5 budgeted films will have quite a few similarities.
Here ya go:

2010s:
John Carter
The Hobbit
Tangled
POTC: On Stranger Tides
The Dark Knight Rises

2000s:
POTC: At World's End
Spider-Man 3
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Avatar
Superman Returns

1990s:
Titanic
Waterworld
Wild Wild West
Tarzan
Armageddon

1980s:
Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
The Abyss
Rambo III
Tango & Cash
Superman II

1970s
Star Trek: The Motion Picture
1941
Apocalypse Now
Moonraker
A Bridge Too Far

1960s:
Hello Dolly
Sweet Charity
The Greatest Story Ever Told
Paint Your Wagon
The Fall of the Roman Empire

1950s
Ben-Hur
The Ten Commandments
Quo Vadis?
Around the World in 80 Days
War and Peace

1940s:
Duel in the Sun
Wilson
The Pirate
It's A Wonderful Life
Red River

1930s:
The Wizard of Oz
Alexander's Ragtime Band
You Can't Take it With You
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Modern Times

1920s:
The Broadway Melody
The Big Parade
Over The Hill to the Poorhouse

Unsurprisingly, the trend is for studios to put out the big bucks for more youth-oriented movies.
Old 03-20-13, 12:46 PM
  #38  
Inane Thread Master, 2018 TOTY
Thread Starter
 
OldBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Are any of us really anywhere?
Posts: 46,760
Received 608 Likes on 522 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

^ that's quite a lot of research done FoD and quite interesting. surprised Tangled was a big budget...
Old 03-20-13, 02:23 PM
  #39  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Giantrobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Gateway Cities/Harbor Region
Posts: 61,284
Received 998 Likes on 673 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Draven View Post

It's been around since the beginnings of the film industry. You should be used to it by now.

Pretty Much.
Old 03-20-13, 02:50 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
Mattflix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Most of this is semantics. The point of it all is that we want creativity out of Hollywood. Compartimentalizing everything doesn't accomplish much.

So Cronenberg's The Fly is a remake even though it shares none of the same characters, location, or storyline? And The Amazing Spider-Man is only a reboot of Raimi's original even though it retells the same origin story? Does it matter really? Hell if The Fly is a remake just because it has the same monster, then Near Dark, Twilight and The Lost Boys are all remakes of Nosferatu (or Dracula if you care that they were based on the same book)

I agree on the comic book origin movies all being the same. They might as well be remakes, and they all exist to cash in on the trend. I applaud Hellboy and Blade because they don't do origin stories; both feel like a slice of the heroes lives, like they do this sort of this every week.

EVERYTHING is an homage or remake to some degree, and it's all about money. The success of Star Wars led to a host of fantasy & sci-fi in the 80's. You can see cash-in trends following any major movie. Orca isn't a remake of Jaws, but it might as well be because it's there just to profit, not to create.
Old 03-20-13, 04:01 PM
  #41  
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The lonely depths of my mind
Posts: 3,863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Hokeyboy View Post
The Thing (technically not a remake, except it was)
Except it wasn't. The 2011 Thing movie was NOT a remake. Just as the 1982 movie wasn't a remake. The 2011 movie was showing what happened right before the 1982 movie. So...how is it a remake ? It's not the same characters. Yeah, it has the same alien and the same location (well, the same general area), but it's still only showing what happened before the original movie.
Old 03-20-13, 04:22 PM
  #42  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Ash Ketchum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,342
Received 180 Likes on 138 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Fist of Doom View Post
Here ya go:

2010s:
John Carter
The Hobbit
Tangled
POTC: On Stranger Tides
The Dark Knight Rises

2000s:
POTC: At World's End
Spider-Man 3
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Avatar
Superman Returns

1990s:
Titanic
Waterworld
Wild Wild West
Tarzan
Armageddon

1980s:
Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
The Abyss
Rambo III
Tango & Cash
Superman II

1970s
Star Trek: The Motion Picture
1941
Apocalypse Now
Moonraker
A Bridge Too Far

1960s:
Hello Dolly
Sweet Charity
The Greatest Story Ever Told
Paint Your Wagon
The Fall of the Roman Empire

1950s
Ben-Hur
The Ten Commandments
Quo Vadis?
Around the World in 80 Days
War and Peace

1940s:
Duel in the Sun
Wilson
The Pirate
It's A Wonderful Life
Red River

1930s:
The Wizard of Oz
Alexander's Ragtime Band
You Can't Take it With You
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Modern Times

1920s:
The Broadway Melody
The Big Parade
Over The Hill to the Poorhouse

Unsurprisingly, the trend is for studios to put out the big bucks for more youth-oriented movies.

This list doesn't seem right to me. In the '60s CLEOPATRA certainly cost way more than all of the films listed. SPARTACUS certainly cost more than FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. And I never heard of SWEET CHARITY having that big a budget. And in the 1930s, GONE WITH THE WIND certainly cost more than each of those five films. Howard Hughes' HELL'S ANGELS (1930) probably cost more also. FOREVER AMBER was one of the most expensive productions in the 1940s yet it's not there.

And I don't believe those three Frank Capra films (IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE, MR. SMITH, YOU CAN'T TAKE IT WITH YOU) came anywhere close to being big-budgeted. WONDERFUL LIFE was done independently, while the other two were done at Columbia where the notoriously tight-fisted Harry Cohn would never ever have let Capra go beyond a certain budget, even if Capra was his top director. Columbia was a Poverty Row studio for much of its early tenure. In the 1930s, THE GREAT ZIEGFELD and MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY certainly cost more than those Capra films, as I'm sure did so many of the major MGM historical epics like MARIE ANTOINETTE and THE GOOD EARTH, to name two off the top of my head.

Try this page for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xpensive_films

It mentions films not on your list including TRUE LIES and TERMINATOR 2 (that belong in the top 5 of the 1990s) and the most expensive film of the 1920s, BEN-HUR (1925).

Last edited by Ash Ketchum; 03-20-13 at 04:40 PM.
Old 03-20-13, 04:30 PM
  #43  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Spottedfeather View Post
Except it wasn't. The 2011 Thing movie was NOT a remake. Just as the 1982 movie wasn't a remake. The 2011 movie was showing what happened right before the 1982 movie. So...how is it a remake ? It's not the same characters. Yeah, it has the same alien and the same location (well, the same general area), but it's still only showing what happened before the original movie.
Correct on 2011 and flat out wrong on 1982.
Old 03-20-13, 04:38 PM
  #44  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Mattflix View Post
Most of this is semantics. The point of it all is that we want creativity out of Hollywood. Compartimentalizing everything doesn't accomplish much.

So Cronenberg's The Fly is a remake even though it shares none of the same characters, location, or storyline? And The Amazing Spider-Man is only a reboot of Raimi's original even though it retells the same origin story? Does it matter really? Hell if The Fly is a remake just because it has the same monster, then Near Dark, Twilight and The Lost Boys are all remakes of Nosferatu (or Dracula if you care that they were based on the same book)

I agree on the comic book origin movies all being the same. They might as well be remakes, and they all exist to cash in on the trend. I applaud Hellboy and Blade because they don't do origin stories; both feel like a slice of the heroes lives, like they do this sort of this every week.

EVERYTHING is an homage or remake to some degree, and it's all about money. The success of Star Wars led to a host of fantasy & sci-fi in the 80's. You can see cash-in trends following any major movie. Orca isn't a remake of Jaws, but it might as well be because it's there just to profit, not to create.
I agree. I think viewing a remake as bad on its face is just wrong. A remake is essentially no guarantee to be bad as is a film that is part of any other genre or classification.

It is a simplistic approach. I just think it helps if people accepted what a remake is and dropped all their personal baggage about any preconceived connotations about remakes (John Carpenter trying to say his The Thing is not a remake...it is adapting the same story...it's a remake).

Remakes are no more necessary or unnecessary than any other film being made. Like any big budgeted film, they are viewed as necessary by the studios b/c they are viewed as potentially profitable. If an independent filmmaker makes a remake of something, it is because he or she feels it is a necessary remake b/c they feel like they can tell that story better or differently.

In the end, it is still a movie that is separate from other adaptations of those stories or plays and should be judged as such. If you make any film, remake or otherwise, that merely apes a bunch of elements from a single film, even if not remaking it, you will lose originality points in the eyes of critics and audiences. Or if you make a fun, inventive film with something to say, the fact that there is some other film other about the same thing will not matter.

Remakes are not necessarily indicative of a lack of creativity in Hollywood, but the quality of those films on the other hand may be.
Old 03-20-13, 04:57 PM
  #45  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Spottedfeather View Post
Except it wasn't. The 2011 Thing movie was NOT a remake. Just as the 1982 movie wasn't a remake. The 2011 movie was showing what happened right before the 1982 movie. So...how is it a remake ? It's not the same characters. Yeah, it has the same alien and the same location (well, the same general area), but it's still only showing what happened before the original movie.
It's almost a remake due to the way it apes Carpenter's film. It's a prequel for sure but it copies the film that's supposed to come next in the narrative. It's very fucking close to bein a remake. I don't understand how you don't see that.
Old 03-20-13, 05:03 PM
  #46  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC View Post
It's almost a remake due to the way it apes Carpenter's film. It's a prequel for sure but it copies the film that's supposed to come next in the narrative. It's very fucking close to bein a remake. I don't understand how you don't see that.
While, he doesn't seem to agree with me on what a remake actually is.

He is right that the 2011 Thing movie is not a remake in that it is a prequel to The Thing.

The fact that is may have been shot like The Thing or borrowed a lot of imagery from that movie simply makes it an unoriginal crapfest of a movie, but not a remake, which should simply be an agnostic term for any film that re-adapts the same source as a film that was made before it.
Old 03-20-13, 05:03 PM
  #47  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,311
Received 463 Likes on 329 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by scott1598 View Post
^ that's quite a lot of research done FoD and quite interesting. surprised Tangled was a big budget...
Keep in mind that most of the budget numbers for films made in the past few decades are just estimates; studios don't release the real numbers if they can help it.

However, part of what contributed to Tangled's likely high cost was the when the Pixar team joined Disney, they essentially restarted the film from scratch. So while the final film likely didn't cost that much, when you include the aborted first attempt it adds up.

Originally Posted by Spottedfeather View Post
Except it wasn't. The 2011 Thing movie was NOT a remake...
I think what the people who state this are getting at is that although the 2011 The Thing is technically a prequel, it follows the story beats of the 1982 The Thing so closely that people experience deja vu watching it. It's akin to a sequel that does little but remake the original film (Hangover 2).

Originally Posted by Mattflix View Post
Most of this is semantics. The point of it all is that we want creativity out of Hollywood. Compartimentalizing everything doesn't accomplish much.
I personally don't get too worked up about whether something is a remake, a reboot, or a "re-adaptation", since all I really care about is if it's good. I don't even really care if it's an "original" story; I'd rather watch a good remake instead of a crappy film based on an original screenplay.

Originally Posted by Mattflix View Post
So Cronenberg's The Fly is a remake even though it shares none of the same characters, location, or storyline? Hell if The Fly is a remake just because it has the same monster, then Near Dark, Twilight and The Lost Boys are all remakes of Nosferatu (or Dracula if you care that they were based on the same book)
The Fly is considered a remake because it remakes the same basic story, which includes the creation of the monster.

However, not all vampire films are remakes of Dracula, because Bram Stoker didn't create vampires, they were an existing folk creature before he used them to tell a story of a specific vampire. Those films that use Stoker's character are then essentially remakes of that story, but Near Dark, Twilight, and the Lost Boys are just different interpretations of the vampire myth.

Originally Posted by Mattflix View Post
I agree on the comic book origin movies all being the same. They might as well be remakes, and they all exist to cash in on the trend. I applaud Hellboy and Blade because they don't do origin stories; both feel like a slice of the heroes lives, like they do this sort of this every week.
Actually, both of those films include the origin story, but are told via flashback. They also both use an outsider character that comes into the story to act as an audience surrogate, get things explained to and caught up to speed. X-Men does this as well somewhat with Wolverine and Rouge entering an already existing X-Men team, although that series eventually actually went back to telling the origin stories in subsequent prequels.

Originally Posted by Mattflix View Post
EVERYTHING is an homage or remake to some degree, and it's all about money. The success of Star Wars led to a host of fantasy & sci-fi in the 80's. You can see cash-in trends following any major movie. Orca isn't a remake of Jaws, but it might as well be because it's there just to profit, not to create.
While studios often hop on trends to make money, I wouldn't say that all movies clearly inspired by a successful film don't have any creative aspirations to themselves. Directors and writers and the rest of the crew typically are looking to make interesting stories. Sometimes a successful film gets a screenplay that was originally languishing a sudden greenlight.
Old 03-20-13, 08:52 PM
  #48  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Ash Ketchum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,342
Received 180 Likes on 138 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

In Japan and Hong Kong, they remake the same classic stories over and over. I have five different film versions of "Chushingura," the famous incident in Japan in the early 1700s where 47 loyal ronin avenged their dead lord by killing the noble who'd caused his ruin. These films date from 1958 to 1994 and they're only a fraction of the huge number of films made about this incident. Dozens of films are based on the famous sword duel between Musashi Miyamoto and Kojiro Sasaki. Many different actors have had the opportunity to play these parts.

In Hong Kong, I can't even count the number of films derived from the famous text, "The Water Margin," about the 108 Bandits of Liangshan Marsh. It's such a huge book that you can make a couple of hundred films each covering a completely different story arc without any overlap. However, many films derived from this book like to focus on Wu Song, the "Tiger Killer," who was played by Ti Lung in multiple films at Shaw Bros. Also, A CHINESE GHOST STORY (1987) was based on "Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio" by Pu Songling, which has provided the material for dozens of Hong Kong ghost films. The list is long.

In the U.S., once upon a time we had multiple films about the Alamo and the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, and multiple films about the exploits of Billy the Kid, Jesse James, Al Capone, and John Dillinger, to name a few. There have been quite a few films about Davy Crockett and quite a few about D-Day. Fictional pop culture icons like Philip Marlowe, Charlie Chan, Tarzan, The Shadow and The Lone Ranger get the same treatment.

For the most part, few if any of the films I've cited in this post tend to be remakes of earlier ones. They're just new films about the same subject matter.

What's my point? To be honest, I've lost track. If the above adds to the discussion in any way, please let me know. If not...never mind.
Old 03-21-13, 09:59 AM
  #49  
Senior Member
 
Mattflix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Jay G. View Post

The Fly is considered a remake because it remakes the same basic story, which includes the creation of the monster.

However, not all vampire films are remakes of Dracula, because Bram Stoker didn't create vampires, they were an existing folk creature before he used them to tell a story of a specific vampire. Those films that use Stoker's character are then essentially remakes of that story, but Near Dark, Twilight, and the Lost Boys are just different interpretations of the vampire myth.


Actually, both of those films include the origin story, but are told via flashback. They also both use an outsider character that comes into the story to act as an audience surrogate, get things explained to and caught up to speed. X-Men does this as well somewhat with Wolverine and Rouge entering an already existing X-Men team, although that series eventually actually went back to telling the origin stories in subsequent prequels.
Yes but they weren't the thrust of the entire story. People are complaining about entire movies that are origin stories, usually featuring a normal kid's coming to learn his newfound superpowers then becoming motivated to use said power for good. Usually by total coincidence a supervillain happens to rise right at the same time the hero does. Blade/Hellboy do have their origins intertwined, but they're already quite experienced and the origins serve as chracter introductions as opposed to the entire movie being about the rise of a new hero.


While studios often hop on trends to make money, I wouldn't say that all movies clearly inspired by a successful film don't have any creative aspirations to themselves. Directors and writers and the rest of the crew typically are looking to make interesting stories. Sometimes a successful film gets a screenplay that was originally languishing a sudden greenlight.
I agree. That's really the thing, most movies stand on the shoulders of other movies to a degree. What counts is how far they can spring from that point forward. I'll use Star Wars as an example again, which borrows several story elements from The Hidden Fortress, along with several of Kurosawa's tricks (like wipe cuts), while also being an homage to old sci-fi serials. The end effect was a pioneering sci-fi series, but at the same time made me want to go back and learn about Kurosawa, which became a whole new world of movies for me.

More examples or near remakes that try to serve as homages: Wes Craven took Bergman's The Virgin Spring and adapted it as the absolute garbage that is The Last House on the Left.

Brian DePalma's best works springboard off Hitchcock's works. They might retell the same story but at the same time darken the themes while also being incredible technica displays.
Old 03-21-13, 10:01 AM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
Mattflix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Reboots, remakes, retreads (The Vent Thread)

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC View Post
It's almost a remake due to the way it apes Carpenter's film. It's a prequel for sure but it copies the film that's supposed to come next in the narrative. It's very fucking close to bein a remake. I don't understand how you don't see that.
If you count that as a remake, then almost every sequel ever would count as a remake. They're often just pale retreads of the first movie. Is every James Bond film since Thunderball a remake of Goldfinger?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.