Re-makes that are better than original?
08-30-07 | 04:36 PM
#1
Thread Starter
TOTY Winner 2018 and Inane Thread Master
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 54,133
Received 1,723 Likes
on
1,413 Posts
From: "Are any of us really anywhere?"
Re-makes that are better than original?
I know it is rare, but with "3:10 to Yuma" coming out and getting stellar reviews, "Halloween" not getting any yet, i was wondering if you think there are re-makes that are better than the originals.
I know I liked "Scarface" (1983) better than the Paul Muni 1932 original.
I know I liked "Scarface" (1983) better than the Paul Muni 1932 original.
08-30-07 | 04:38 PM
#2
DVD Talk Legend
This topic again?
fine.
Dawn of the Dead. There, I said it.
fine.
Dawn of the Dead. There, I said it.
08-30-07 | 04:52 PM
#5
Thread Starter
TOTY Winner 2018 and Inane Thread Master
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 54,133
Received 1,723 Likes
on
1,413 Posts
From: "Are any of us really anywhere?"
Originally Posted by DthRdrX
The Thing is my winner as well.
I prefer Romero's DOTD.
I prefer Romero's DOTD.
08-30-07 | 05:00 PM
#8
DVD Talk Hero
The Thing, The Fly, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Ring, Oceans 11
08-30-07 | 05:17 PM
#10
DVD Talk Legend
Ocean's Eleven
08-30-07 | 09:02 PM
#13
DVD Talk Legend
The Thing
I know these next two might be considered blasphemous but I prefer the remakes of When A Stranger Calls and The Hills Have Eyes to the originals. I respect the originals and enjoy watching them but something about the remakes make me enjoy them even more.
I know these next two might be considered blasphemous but I prefer the remakes of When A Stranger Calls and The Hills Have Eyes to the originals. I respect the originals and enjoy watching them but something about the remakes make me enjoy them even more.
08-30-07 | 09:13 PM
#14
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Near the Great Salt Lake
The Maltese Falcon
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (please forgive me...)
But of course both of these are based on books, so you could make the argument that they aren't really remakes, but just different interpretations of the book...
In a lot of ways, I enjoy the Peter Jackson version of "King Kong" a lot more than the 1933 original, but I'd have a hard time arguing that it is a better film.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (please forgive me...)
But of course both of these are based on books, so you could make the argument that they aren't really remakes, but just different interpretations of the book...
In a lot of ways, I enjoy the Peter Jackson version of "King Kong" a lot more than the 1933 original, but I'd have a hard time arguing that it is a better film.
)
08-30-07 | 09:29 PM
#16
DVD Talk Legend
The remake of the Hills have Eyes, the original is pale in comparison to it.
08-30-07 | 09:43 PM
#18
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by EdTheRipper
The Thing
I know these next two might be considered blasphemous but I prefer the remakes of When A Stranger Calls and The Hills Have Eyes to the originals. I respect the originals and enjoy watching them but something about the remakes make me enjoy them even more.
I know these next two might be considered blasphemous but I prefer the remakes of When A Stranger Calls and The Hills Have Eyes to the originals. I respect the originals and enjoy watching them but something about the remakes make me enjoy them even more.
08-30-07 | 10:40 PM
#21
DVD Talk Legend
I love 2004 Dawn of the Dead, IMO it is a hell of a lot better than the original, which I don't care for at all.
08-30-07 | 10:46 PM
#22
Let's try and take it back a lil' further:
Ben-Hur (1959)
Moby Dick (1956)
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Ben-Hur (1959)
Moby Dick (1956)
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
