@@dezmundo1251 That joke was great but I prefer the original :)
@lorenzoamato9534 жыл бұрын
@@benjammin8184 This sequel joke was ok... but I prefer the first one ;)
@somethingsomethingsomethingdar5 жыл бұрын
Maybe if Hollywood stopped trying to remake successful movies and instead remade previous failures they might find better luck. There are plenty of movies with great concepts and horrible execution
@lg99415 жыл бұрын
Great point
@ZeroFPV5 жыл бұрын
That's not how things work. You won't get somebody invest his money into something that failed before. A farmer doesn't plant the smallest potatoes from the last harvest, he plants the biggest. Always in hope to get even bigger potatoes in the future.
@somethingsomethingsomethingdar5 жыл бұрын
ZeroFPV Oh I know they won’t do it
@Fluoride_Jones5 жыл бұрын
+Juan Pablo Munoz A good example of where Hollywood did just that was with the "Judge Dredd" remake. It was a gamble, because many still had a bad taste in their mouth from the original. They pulled it off, though, and now the remake is considered a bit of a cult classic.
@Fluoride_Jones5 жыл бұрын
+George Sidiropoulos Yes, it is!
@vicenteortegarubilar94185 жыл бұрын
The Blob, The thing, the fly, horror masterpieces, all of them remakes.
@KaltatheNobleMind5 жыл бұрын
and all of them nouns :D
@vicenteortegarubilar94185 жыл бұрын
@@KaltatheNobleMind nothing more terrifying than a noun.
@thel13555 жыл бұрын
The Noun, coming soon. A remake of every thing.
@Tubeite5 жыл бұрын
The greatest remake of all time is probably 1963's Cleopatra.
@charliedawson48775 жыл бұрын
Ben Hur (1959)
@EndCreditReviews5 жыл бұрын
I love the remake of The Mummy (1999) because it does have the basic story points of the original with Imhotep being cursed, being resurrected, and trying to resurrect his lost love. But it took that idea and expanded upon it by having Imhotep doing more with his powers. It also developed characters a lot more and it did a lot more with it's story. Not to mention that there is a lot of great action scenes and a romance that doesn't feel forced. All of these things is what the 2017 remake got wrong.
@shadows-sweet-embrace5 жыл бұрын
The 1999 The Mummy is also a really fun movie, while the 2017 one is not.
@Slappap5 жыл бұрын
idk why the hell they had to do that sucky end in the second one though I just would have had anck su namun maybe hesitate and Imhotep get pulled in too far for her to reach him and look back at the good guys and just jump in after Imhotep or anck su namun get killed on the way to help him. leave it as a tragic love story for them that was always inevitable. i just hate that she ran away. its the one thing i hated that the bad guys cant have true love also.
@fabiotellez61925 жыл бұрын
maybe in 2017 they just wanted to take the story in another direction. I like all of them.
@scaccu4 жыл бұрын
idk, mummies are classic horror villains, i've never ever enjoyed to the fullest the comedic take of the 90-00 saga.
@docbuni4 жыл бұрын
@@scaccu Imhotep was scary enough in the 1999 movie. No, he isn't as scary as actual horror antagonists, but given the tone of the film... I found it enjoyable, anyways. It was one of my favorite films as a kid but I would have to rewatch it as an old one to properly rate it.
@gravestoneXD25 жыл бұрын
Five years ago it seemed like we were getting direct remakes once a month. Now most of those spots have been replaced with soft reboots-sequels
@Roboshi20075 жыл бұрын
That's because a reboot is just a remake in different shoes.
@lespion74115 жыл бұрын
tbh I think having sequels to old films is better than remaking them we already have some good examples like Creed and The Force Awakens
@bananaempijama5 жыл бұрын
Sea boots
@lespion74115 жыл бұрын
?
@danielebowman5 жыл бұрын
@@lespion7411 The Force Awakens is essentially a re-make pretending to be a sequel. It's the exactly same plot as A New Hope. It sadly doesn't have any of the strong characters.
@Ryan-04135 жыл бұрын
I think the best remakes are remakes of movies that weren't insanely successful
@blondbraid79865 жыл бұрын
Exactly, then there's room for improvement. There's no point fixing something that isn't broken.
@samwallaceart2885 жыл бұрын
Jeff Bridges didn’t know why the Coen Bros. thought True Grit needed a remake until he read the book and realised how similar the book is to Coen Bros filmography.
@LibraGamesUnlimited5 жыл бұрын
I've said that for years but try and convience the stuido heads of that. I think they should be focused on movies that did middle of the road or fizzled but had a good core concept. Something a good director of today could really sink their teeth into and/or something people living today might not even remember or heard about.
@Ryan-04135 жыл бұрын
Well take movies like The Fly and The Thing. Both were based on movies from the 50s, had generally the same idea (man turns into a demented fly-creature, alien can mimic people/animals), but presented them in different ways, making it more of a body-horror thing.
@LibraGamesUnlimited5 жыл бұрын
True and I for one am so glad they didn't do that little human head on a fly body thing. No matter how good the effects could've been there is no making that no look silly today.
@kevinhawkins9405 жыл бұрын
1978 Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a masterpiece
@YTEdy4 жыл бұрын
Yes. I saw it as a kid - well, maybe 14 or 15. It scared the hell out of me, and I loved Leonard Nimoy as an actor. He had such presence. I saw Nimoy on stage in Equus and I thought he was better than Richard Burton in that role . . . but I digress. Yes, the 78 version kicked ass. Well acted. Perfect film for it's time.
@ianfindly32574 жыл бұрын
Some REMAKES that I LIKE are Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), Nosferatu The Vampire (1979), The Thing (1982), Cat People (1982) and Scarface (1983). However, THOSE are OLDER remakes, and not part of this shitty current Hollywood remake TREND, which I pretty much DETEST.
@ricardocantoral76725 жыл бұрын
I think it's unfair to say that De Palma's Scarface doesn't bring anything new. The De Palma film was something of a political essay. Montana was chasing the American dream and his "say goodnight to the bad guy" speech was a summary of the film's message; Tony is no more villainous than those who run the country. Regarding my favorite remake, I would say Werner Herzog's Nosferatu is just as brilliant as the original Murnau film. Herzog adds his own voice by emphasizing the tragedy of Dracula and he makes the argument that his existence is not some force of evil but a force of nature.
@VideoMask935 жыл бұрын
Ricardo Cantoral Herzog also captures the same dreamlike feel in a new way.
@Bowiiihowdy4 жыл бұрын
what i like a bout the 83 scarface is it feels like the whole movies done a ton of blow before you seen it. its got all these intense highs and lows and its just a feverish mess its awsome. for a 3 hr movie it does not feel its length its not slow or plodding it just rams thru the station
@princessmonokae5 жыл бұрын
Who will take care of Lumpy?!
@henryglennon38645 жыл бұрын
Mala, now the Itchy is dead.
@zetetick3954 жыл бұрын
With any luck, the oncologist.
@kev3d5 жыл бұрын
"Murr prrbrr frrmrr. Gerrt terrmer murr." -Every line from Rooster Cogburn in the True Grit remake.
@battra925 жыл бұрын
I think one thing that's inherently flawed in Hollywood thinking (and that of the general audience that eats up and demands remakes and reboots) is the notion that newer is better. This is of course quite a silly assumption to make just as "older is better." The 1907 version of Ben Hur is stagey and dull though historically interesting. The 1925 and 1959 versions are themselves their own movies (though the 59 version does borrow more than a little from the 25 version) and both take the source material seriously and create a good film. The 2016 version has no redeemable qualities and why it was made is a mystery.
@SianaGearz5 жыл бұрын
I don't think whether newer is better is something that keeps the executuves up at night or is of any relevance to them. Fact of the matter is, after a while, the commercial potential of a product is exhausted. You can't keep making money from selling fresh copies of The Mummy from 1999 any longer, even though people have favourable memory and feeling associated with that film, they had fun watching it back then, but aren't really compelled to pay for it again, it never had the kind of depth that invites repeat viewing. So to turn that positive emotion into new money, you need to make a new movie, and the executives don't care whether it will be crap, it only has to be good enough for people to part with their money once again, just once. Enough good stuff to make a 30 second trailer and then pad it out to a couple hours.
@siukong5 жыл бұрын
It is an inherently flawed way of thinking. Unfortunately, two facts will continue to perpetuate this: 1) love of novelty is hardwired into our psychology, and 2) most movies cannot avoid having a visual look strongly reminiscent of their time. Everything from the filming technology to shot selection to actor accents to fashion to special effects combine to make most movies feel 'of their time' and for various reasons most viewers are disdainful of that. It really is too bad that so many aren't willing to give old movies a chance, but at least there's a sort of perverse karma there, since in 50 years most of today's movies will have been dismissed and forgotten in the same way.
@Kevin_Street5 жыл бұрын
I don't think audiences are demanding remakes. Once in a while the desire to remake a movie comes from a director or writer (usually when the original belongs to a time that's become fashionably retro) - but for the most part it's movie industry executives that drive the endless cycle of remakes and reboots. They're always trying to minimize the studio's financial risk by coming up with concepts that are certain to succeed. If a movie was a hit the first time, then surely the remake will succeed as well.
@keithklassen53204 жыл бұрын
It'$ $uch a my$tery....
@montecristo18454 жыл бұрын
Sometimes a remake happens because the studios think they have their finger on the audience’s pulse or they aren’t willing to take a risk on a project and decide to go with a “safe” bet. Other times it’s because the copyright is about to expire and they don’t want to lose the rights to whatever they’ve been sitting on for years.
@irina12965 жыл бұрын
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) is such an underrated masterpiece. I adore this remake.
@claytongoode84225 жыл бұрын
The final shot still gives me chills
@NoeLPZC5 жыл бұрын
Totally agree, although I wish it were shorter.
@VicenteTorresAliasVits5 жыл бұрын
How is it underrated?
@andrewjensen81285 жыл бұрын
@@VicenteTorresAliasVits That is a very fair question. I think a more accurate way to phrase it would be to call it under appreciated. It was held in very high regards by critics and the movie going public on its release, but it does feel like it has been forgotten at times.
@lunabearsong20435 жыл бұрын
It's the best version, in my opinion. Really haunting, bleak and holds are a lot of truth.
@makatron5 жыл бұрын
Literally binge watched the entire channel the past couple of weeks, finally catching up a fresh upload the day it was published. Huge fan here... Of the lava lamp.
@GetToDaChoppa-k5r5 жыл бұрын
That is not really a compliment. Just go out and buy a damn lava lamp then.
@irishjoe29414 жыл бұрын
no hassle are you dumb?
@lhei_tayuun5 жыл бұрын
Bit disappointed we didn't get a quip about The Thing from Another World (1951). Worth watching. Love me some fast-talking 50s dialog.
@demoman874 жыл бұрын
yes, glad you mentioned this. Carpenter's remake of the 1950s one is an example of how to do a remake the right way
@tremorsfan4 жыл бұрын
Also, the 2011 film is a prequel.
@78deathface5 жыл бұрын
11:37 R.I.P. Miguel Ferrer
@GetToDaChoppa-k5r5 жыл бұрын
Amazing that Ronnie Cox outlived him. Remember that line: 'We're young and he's old and that's life.'?
@persjodin34075 жыл бұрын
Great actor indeed. Albert Rosenfield will always be one of the best characters ever made for television, like so many other characters from Twin Peaks.
@ainternet2395 жыл бұрын
You didn't mention the trend for remaking films, when the paint isn't yet dry on the old one, e.g. Spiderman. 3 Spiderman remakes in 15 years? Wtf?
@joshuabell77615 жыл бұрын
Indeed. TASM wasn't necessary. It just repeated ideas from the Raimi films with no real update. Homecoming was necessary in my mind.
@Ragnarok5405 жыл бұрын
The last one is way above the first 2. And not just because younger aunt May.
@mistertagomago79745 жыл бұрын
Raimi had the best Evil Dead
@ChrisHarperBooks5 жыл бұрын
This mostly comes down to 2 things: money and control over the spiderman IP. Sony had to keep making the damn things to keep control over spiderman. Also, spiderman was one of the few instantly recognizable superheroes in the pre-mcu world, and so was at least a guarantee that they'd get their money back. At least with the merging back into the MCU there seems to be the possibility of broader, and newer stories. I do have hope for the animated Spiderman coming later this year, though. It looks fun.
@siukong5 жыл бұрын
@@ChrisHarperBooks yet another unfortunate side effect of our flawed copyright/IP laws.
@Paul_Hardy5 жыл бұрын
Stories can be re-told and still feel completely original if they're told from a different point of view.
@D0NU755 жыл бұрын
unless they are not
@KaltatheNobleMind5 жыл бұрын
execution trumps content every time.
@goldfishprime5 жыл бұрын
That's how Obi-wan did it
@jeffbangle47105 жыл бұрын
Yes - for example, how many times have various Shakespeare stories been re-told?
@GTONeko5 жыл бұрын
So true overall. A strong case in point is the recent drama movie A Star Is Born.
@ShipMonster5 жыл бұрын
Honestly though, the solution to all of these bad remakes is : more shaky cam. As of now I can still understand some of what's going on in modern movies.
@ravenlord45 жыл бұрын
I think Jackson's Middle Earth adaptions show both sides of this. LOTR was a masterpiece. The Hobbit was a cash grab.
@battmarn5 жыл бұрын
raven lord the hobbit could have been almost as good as Lotr if it had the same amount of prep but it ended up being rushed out and ruined by the studio. There’s a really interesting video series about it on KZfaq called The Hobbit A Long Expected Autopsy by Lindsay Ellis
@UmbrellaGent5 жыл бұрын
Or potential masterpiece fcked by the studio.
@thealphaincel16195 жыл бұрын
BattMarn "Lindsay Ellis" pass.
@peterjoyfilms5 жыл бұрын
raven lord The Hobbit was a far more complex scenario than just being a "cash grab". M
@VadersFist955 жыл бұрын
@Finn MacCool No...it really didnt.
@RonJohn634 жыл бұрын
The 1932 Scarface was so old by 1983 that a simple update would suffice.
@MahraiZiller5 жыл бұрын
Odd that you didn’t explore the “Seven Samurai/Magnificent Seven” story. Surely ripe for another angle about how remakes/reboots/reimaginings happen, when even cross-cultural themes are adapted to new audiences. The examples you give are pretty much just separated by time: old films repackaged or reimagined for a new audience. However, the magnificent seven is an example of a film reimagined for a different culture altogether - separated not just by time, but by ancestral culture. I’d have included that, or at least another example of it.
@mistertagomago79745 жыл бұрын
I think a Fistful of dollars is a better example.
@siukong5 жыл бұрын
You raise a good point. But perhaps this doesn't quite overlap with our common conception of a 'remake' (even though it technically is one). I will just say that a cultural adaptation will often be more immune to many of the pitfalls outlined in the video. Due to its very nature of being adapted to a new culture it's already reimagining things and will be less prone to feeling like a rehash, and the fact that foreign movies usually have a smaller audience means that fewer people will be familiar with the original at all. This does bring up the interesting scenario of how audiences view the original if they see it after its adaptation (effectively making the original, foreign version the "remake" in their eyes). IMO the whole cross-cultural topic probably requires its own separate discussion to do it full justice.
@Kevin_Street5 жыл бұрын
Cross-cultural remakes work very well in the western genre but don't seem to be as successful in horror, even though there are many more examples of Japanese horror films remade by Hollywood.
@SAM-ru4vx5 жыл бұрын
the bruce willis remake is good too
@mahirahmed16595 жыл бұрын
@@Kevin_Street There's a very good reason for that. Japanese and Korean horrors have a very different tone to Hollywood's horrors. Hollywood focuses heavily on the monster and uses the story to make the monster seem more scary. The Asian horrors tell a story and use the monster to make the story more scary. The perfect example is the grudge. The original Japanese film is a story about a "curse" where people fall victim to someone else's problem (the grudge!). It starts off with a tragedy and the movie shows how this one tragedy goes on to affect everyone's life and by the end the entire town has fallen victim to the original grudge. It's a cautionary tale, and the monsters are metaphorical - they represent a grudge that is literally eating everyone up. Now move over to Hollywood. Well if you say "the grudge" you forget the original word and concept. You just think of the creepy kid and the hand in the hair. The horror is fully focused on this one character whereas the original is exploring the effects on an entire town. Both versions explore the story and the visual horror, but it's about how those things are used. It's the reason why the best horror movies are the ones where the monster represents an idea and isn't just a physical thing. It's easy to remember the graphic horror of The Exorcist and The Thing (my favourite horror movies) but they were used to support the story and the idea, not be the main spectacle on their own. Some recent western horrors have been able to do this well such as The Babadook or It Follows, but for the most part the west is too caught up in making a monster so they can sell toys or get royalties for jumpscares or something.
@maxobyrne14745 жыл бұрын
I knew there was a reason I was up at 3am
@scientistsbaffled57305 жыл бұрын
Its because you hadn't gone to sleep yet.
@Eirik_Bloodaxe5 жыл бұрын
I was really confused by this, as it's 7 pm. Then I googled London Time, and it makes more sense lmao.
@chefmesser4205 жыл бұрын
@@Eirik_Bloodaxe duh
@Turtleproof5 жыл бұрын
Futa?
@kylemagaro2315 жыл бұрын
Insomnia? Cause I'm never asleep before 3. Getting to sleep before 5 even when waking up at 8 is a rarity for me, but 3 hours is enough for me.
@RepAlbertThomas5 жыл бұрын
Dear Mr Schmidt. I’ve been a fan of your videos now for a while. Your take on the movie industry has been thought provoking and I take note of a lot of what you say. I don’t know if you would ever be interested in doing something like this but I would be very interested in hearing how you speculate on upcoming movies. Honestly, seeing the early previews of the upcoming Joker film is what made me think of making this request. Thanks again!
@WordUnheard5 жыл бұрын
Not one mention of David Croneberg's The Fly? For shame! I forgive both you and lava lamp, but The Fly had damn well have an upcoming episode, or I'll sit here and type, while doing nothing.
@cazazzadan5 жыл бұрын
When I saw a young Jeff Goldblum in the thumbnail I was getting ready for some hand dissolving action with my morning coffee.
@YTEdy4 жыл бұрын
@@cazazzadan "Better watch out, he eats chocolate bars"
@timfondiggle25823 жыл бұрын
Word unheard? Lol your name alone makes you less than human
@SAPProd5 жыл бұрын
The most amazing notion of a remake coming out and being superior to the original is The Maltese Falcon starring Humphrey Bogart; it was made because the original film was no longer viable to the filmgoing scene due to Hayes Code restrictions, so a lot of subtext and allusion had to be employed, and in essence, is a lot smarter film, making the audience look for what’s going on with the characters under the surface. Also, it’s a technically better film under first-time Director John Huston, so right there you have two reasons. Plus, and here’s the rub that I throw towards people who say all modern Hollywood does is remake classic films, not only was The Maltese Falcon (1941) ONLY ten years removed from the original film, it was the SECOND remake of the film, with Betty Davis’s Satan Met A Lady being released in 1936, again for reasons of “decency”, but it’s near universally agreed that the 1941 film, which propelled Bogart to leading man stardom, is the superior film in all perspective.
@handsomebrick5 жыл бұрын
Oddly remakes were pretty common back then.
@keiskay5 жыл бұрын
@@handsomebrick that was due to films being lost and destroyed rather frequently or not doing well with audiences, movies were added to and had reshoots frequently that occurred even after they were released. There's several different cuts of king Kong, with the original cut being completely lost.
@siukong5 жыл бұрын
Also consider that the film industry was advancing so rapidly in those years relative to today. I wouldn't really consider pre-WWII in the same conversation as modern remakes for that reason. Going from silent movies to talkies, B&W to color, all while throwing in new filming technology, directors exploring new shooting techniques, the Hays code, the studio system, and the societal upheaval of two world wars and the Great Depression and you have an atmosphere much more conducive to multiple retellings of the same story, that can each have their own spin on it.
@YTEdy4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of the 1931 version.
@johnnhoj67494 жыл бұрын
@@handsomebrick Until TV started buying feature films and especially before VHS many older films, even a handful of years old, were completely unavailable to the average viewer. Now, a film which is more than half a century old can be instantly available and far more "of the present" than a 5 year old film would have been in 1950. The explosion in the internet and media generally also means that a current audience can hardly miss the fact that a new film is a remake, whereas much of the audience in, say, 1965 might not have been.
@hewasfuzzywuzzy35835 жыл бұрын
I'm still waiting for the next re-reboot of Predator.
@gamehero68164 жыл бұрын
@@jr2904 I'm the next step in human evolution? WHEEEEEE!!!! Yes. I am #actuallyautistic and I deem such a concept messed up and problematic.
@daRiddler323 жыл бұрын
@@gamehero6816 and borderline insulting on how they portrayed it (like you I am also on the Spectrum)
@Football__Junkie5 жыл бұрын
The 1969 True Grit was beautifully shot.
@ianfindly32574 жыл бұрын
Some REMAKES that I LIKE are Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), Nosferatu The Vampire (1979), The Thing (1982), Cat People (1982) and Scarface (1983). However THOSE are OLDER remakes, and not part of this shitty current Hollywood remake TREND, which I pretty much DETEST.
@seanbaugh32395 жыл бұрын
The British Professor X is dropping that knowledge. *"NUFF SAID"*
@joesycamore28995 жыл бұрын
The X-Men reboots are better than the originals
@Dohsoda5 жыл бұрын
The 1978 version of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is a pretty fantastic horror-thriller. Also, I also do enjoy for various reasons: Horror of Dracula (1958) The Thing (1982) The Mummy (1999) Alfie (2004) Dawn of the Dead (2004) King Kong (2005) True Grit (2010)
@SocietateaAscendenta4 жыл бұрын
Bruh, I have seen and listened so many movie reviewers (I KNOW, you are not doing "classical reviews"), BUT although many are quite talented young chumps, YOU ARE BY FAR my favorite right now and I have only seen couple of your videos only! The way and style you bring stuff to a final point, man... And your calm and respectful style is the best!
@skepticalbadger5 жыл бұрын
Sometimes it's just updating visuals and script for a modern audience, as with Bodysnatchers. No harm at all in that sort of remake, provided enough time has elapsed.
@gamingguru2k65 жыл бұрын
Barbwire is a great Casablanca remake. That is how you remake Citizen Kane. Just make a movie that is entertainingly stupid.
@YTEdy4 жыл бұрын
Sharknado is my favorite Casablanca remake, but Barbwire's good too.
@seanmcardle5 жыл бұрын
i really enjoy your shtick george
@davidjames5795 жыл бұрын
I think it's interesting how there's a noticeable change in acting between films, even across a brief divide of 1968's True Grit and 1978's Body Snatchers. It's like the acting in the former (and earlier films) is more melodramatic, put-on, but also like the actors are playing to an audience, it's very showbiz-y. This also comes across in the music, and the obvious studio sets and lighting.
@larknix31115 жыл бұрын
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9 probably because of this movement
@davidjames5795 жыл бұрын
@@larknix3111 Thanks! I think it's interesting to try and find where the change occurred. It's funny but it does seem a big chasm, dividing how films were and how films became and have stayed. And yet it happened in a short space of time. I think it's fair to say this occurred in the 60's. It's funny that even certain directors changed in this. Look at Kubrick's films all the way up to Doctor Strangelove. From 2001 onwards, the style and acting and presentation, inc editing becomes more naturalistic. Films like The Graduate marked a sea change, as did Midnight Cowboy. Westerns seemed to be one of the last hangover genres, with all of Wayne's films up to his last, The Shootist, in 1976, keeping that manner. And other films like Paint Your Wagon had that. On the whole though, Eastwood seems to have been instrumental in updating the Western, bringing aspects from the Spaghetti Westerns he'd made. And along with others like Little Big Man, The Missouri Breaks, and McCabe And Mrs Miller changed it for good. In fact I think the only hold-out was the Disaster movie, with Irwin Allen churning out the same style up to 1980.
@angeliparraguirre73295 жыл бұрын
I've been away from your content for too long. Glad to see your style again, it's good stuff.
@DaviniaHill5 жыл бұрын
You, my dude, have not seen MTV Cribs. Scarface is plenty celebrated.
@irishjoe29414 жыл бұрын
John Stroud it’s basically “Celebrated” by wannabe “Gangster” rappers which most of them don’t any morales as it is.
@Mathew19_265 жыл бұрын
Great video Georg*, as always, but what about spiritual remakes? Films like "Blow Up", "The Conversation" and "Blow Out", having pretty much identical setups (An obsessive media pro discovers a controversy in his work) but all three explore different realities for their protagonists. All three have similar beats, and similar conclusions. Spiritual remakes. There are countless others like that, that make you question if there really is any originality in the craft, or whether originality is really important. What are your thoughts on those?
@JanTuts4 жыл бұрын
Many people fail to realise that Paul Verhoeven's Robocop, Starship Troopers, and Total Recall were SATIRE, not just action movies. When you lose that element, it just falls flat, and that goes for both sequels and remakes.
@aaronchef825 жыл бұрын
George, hola from San Antonio, TX. Please continue your videos! The humor, the insight, the psychology is great!
@GenericInternetter5 жыл бұрын
The core concept of the original Robocop was the ambiguity between Robocop being a conscious man trapped in a machine body, or a lifeless machine simply using a dead man's brain as a processor. That is literally the very cornerstone of what Robocop was about. It was perfectly woven into the story and it gave the story deeper meaning. Robocop 2014 completely missed the point. It presented no question at all, simply putting the hero into a machine body and sending him off to catch the bad guys. A complete and utter writing failure.
@larknix31115 жыл бұрын
But then they would've had to include the subtext of the struggle of corporate vs. personal identity! /s
@hapdf5 жыл бұрын
The core concept of the new robocop is how to beat a human conscience and soul so that it fits the demand of the company that uses him. The struggle between corporate and personnal Identity is present throught Gary Oldman 's character who is at first driven by altruistic motivation but because of the pressure of his boss agrees to beat Murphy's identity and free will and make him a robot before finding a redemption. In a sense the scientist is the main character of the movie.
@paulsneddon12345 жыл бұрын
Hi George, getting in here while there are few comments. Love the channel, keep up the good work
@Peepholecircus5 жыл бұрын
He won't answer you anyhow, too busy snatching bodies. And snatches,
@NickOwens5 жыл бұрын
You know, after careful consideration, I’ve come to the conclusion that in the modern age of social media and the paranoia of constantly being watched, a new ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’, if done well, could be made. Imagine the plot of the human race being assimilated, but with the added narrative changes one could make with the setting of modern day. Everything being posted on social media, for better or worse. People being able to contact one another. In the age where everything is public, it would be interesting to see how what was originally quite a quiet and reserved invasion, would take place now.
@Corn_Pone_Flicks4 жыл бұрын
I thought of that recently myself, with the twist being that everyone wanted to become a pod person and share a collective consciousness, rather than resisting it and retaining individuality. Modern culture seems all about documenting and posting all the details of your life for the world to see and share. We used to value our privacy.
@alexandredion21514 жыл бұрын
I’m addicted to your video essays. Good job ! 🤘🏼
@Strelok7624 жыл бұрын
I honestly enjoy the True Grit remake more than the original!
@LiberalsGettheBulletToo5 жыл бұрын
Casablanca starring two star-crossed Middle Eastern refugees seeking safe passage out of modern-day London during the ravages of WW3.
@HappyCynic5 жыл бұрын
Barb Wire was a remake of Casablanca.
@Edward_Plantagenet5 жыл бұрын
No way man the one staring Myra Binglebat and Peter Beardsley was definitive.
@HappyCynic5 жыл бұрын
@@Edward_Plantagenet You win the internet.
@Edward_Plantagenet5 жыл бұрын
eldospinks I couldn’t resist mate had to drop that quote while the iron was hot lol
@YTEdy4 жыл бұрын
@@HappyCynic Was it? I thought that was a gag? Like Sharknado being a remake of Jaws.
@nikolaisthirdeye19135 жыл бұрын
One of the most under subbed channels on youtube bar none keep up the good work you god amongst men
@ChrisisisB5 жыл бұрын
0:38 The discomfort of the lava-lamp when thinkng about The Predator is obvious.
@rickandrygel9135 жыл бұрын
I have not seen 'The Predator,' does that mean I win?
@azzarrax5 жыл бұрын
12:39 SPOILERS: The Thing (2011) certainly feels like a remake of the 1982 film, but it's technically a prequel; it ends right where the 1982 film begins.
@HappyCynic5 жыл бұрын
Thus, taking away any mystery for the next film.
@richardcramer16045 жыл бұрын
A. Delta, the 1982 film is a remake of the 1951 film "The Thing from Another World".
@user-cp9id1mj8b4 жыл бұрын
Your transition from movie to movie is impeccable
@TheOldMan-755 жыл бұрын
Stumbled upon your channel just a few days ago. Great stuff! Looking forward to going through your videos.
@SkorMedia5 жыл бұрын
The last time when I was this early, is when I was this early.
@HamishDownie5 жыл бұрын
It’s not a movie, but the 2000s Battlestar Galactica has got to be one of the greatest remakes
@jamescarter31965 жыл бұрын
That’s an example of the newer version being superior, in my opinion. I like old Battlestar, but it tried too hard to shoehorn in stuff like disco and other things that really date it badly for some episodes.
@rogerkomula80574 жыл бұрын
Right up until the disjointed unsatisfying ending. If only they could have kept it as fresh as the first few seasons.
@anubusx5 жыл бұрын
Alien is a remake of the 1958 film It The Terror From Outer Space.
@HistoritorJimaldus4 жыл бұрын
The Fly and The Thing are two of my fave remakes
@egoborder32035 жыл бұрын
Georg, in the 90s there were lot of movie adaptations of classic television series. Like, A LOT. Some of these were pretty good (Maverick) while some were mediocre-to-bad (The Flintstones). Any thoughts on these?
@GetToDaChoppa-k5r5 жыл бұрын
Flintstones was great fun though.
@larknix31115 жыл бұрын
@@GetToDaChoppa-k5r Didn't it kill Kyle MacLachlan's leading man status in movies? Or was it Showgirls that did that?
@BensonLicious5 жыл бұрын
Still thinking about those beans
@VicenteTorresAliasVits5 жыл бұрын
Great video. I'd like to clarify that THE THING (2011) and THE PREDATOR (2018) aren't remakes nor reboots. They were advertised that way supposedly to attract viewers who weren't familiar with the originals, but the former is a prequel (even though it manages to recycle the original's plot) and the latter is a sequel. The original ROBOCOP had a couple of scenes related to the title character's internal conflict of wanting to hold on to his human side, but the script writers never really went anywhere with that. The sequel spent a lot more time on it... only to forget about it half way through. The 2nd sequel didn’t even mention it! The remake does develop that aspect, which is why I prefer it.
@Repulse964 жыл бұрын
As I was about to watch this video I get bombarded by a movie ad about a Pinnochio remake
@theneonchimpchannel90955 жыл бұрын
I liked the Total Recall remake, but then it wasn't supposed to be a Total Recall remake. I've said it before elsewhere, but the Director wanted to do another film based on the same book. The studio wouldn't fund it however, unless he named it Total Recall and put in a few key moments from the original movie. I'd say this has happened with other remakes too. The studio thinks they can make more money with a recognizable title.
@joesycamore28995 жыл бұрын
Neither of the films is anything like the original story
@RBASHA15 жыл бұрын
worst remake is the Oldboy remake.
@tylerskiss5 жыл бұрын
That was bad. Often when Hollywood remakes foreign films, they inevitably change the key ingredient that made the original stand out. The remake of Insomnia, while well liked for the most part, completely ruined the ending that made the original stand out. Same with that forgotten Kiefer Sutherland film The Vanishing, which took a great film and did a typical "Hollywood ending" that killed it. Or Quarantine changed the scariest part of the original [REC] which was the supernatural element- granted, building their marketing campaign on the final shot in the film wasn't such a great idea either...
@handsomebrick5 жыл бұрын
They do that even when they remake Hollywood films, like The Omega Man.
@theunbearablejuan5 жыл бұрын
The Vanishing's remake is even more baffling considering it was directed by the same person that directed the original but he decided to change the ending completely. I don't get it.
@siukong5 жыл бұрын
@@tylerskiss yeah I think that's more a problem with adaptations in general, and not remaking foreign films in particular.
@mgarcar12555 жыл бұрын
I saw Jeff Goldblum in the thumbnail and thought you would talk about The Fly (1986). It is probably my favorite remake of all time. It really does a good job of making you go through an emotional rollercoaster, while at the same time, using wonderful/modern practical effects.
@artistjim1145 жыл бұрын
I Just love you're wit and humor! It cracks me up every time!
@fILTHY_cASUAL5 жыл бұрын
No mention of parodies? Aren't they a kind of remake/reboot/re-whatever? I love movies like Dracula - Dead and Loving It, Robin Hood - Men in Tights, Spaceballs... actually, all of Mel Brooks' movies, I guess. And Hot Shots!, Shaun of the Dead, Galaxy Quest. I could go on and on. A parody inherently brings something new to the table, namely humor. Though obviously many of them fail to do so well. There's also Epic Movie, Superhero Movie, Meet the Spartans, and so on.
@blondbraid79865 жыл бұрын
I'd say that the big difference between good and bad parodies is that good parodies, like Hot Shots! and Spaceballs, takes tropes from the original movies and makes fun of them while still being fun for those who haven't seen the original. Meanwhile bad parodies like Epic movie and Meet the Spartans just drops a bunch of pop culture references without context in between random gross-out jokes. I wish hack comedy makers would learn that disgusting things doesn't automatically equal funny.
@YTEdy4 жыл бұрын
That should be a separate video, but it's a good idea for a separate video.
@Howlingd0g4 жыл бұрын
Black Dynamite will always be my favourite parody, sometimes it's so close to its source material you almost forget it is a parody at all, it's more of a tongue in cheek love letter in many ways.
@vksasdgaming94724 жыл бұрын
Great parody needs affection. Great parody Airplane! is actually very serious in its plot and script and its parody is a filter it is shown.
@Matt-iy4tn5 жыл бұрын
I thought "Vanilla Sky" was a good remake of "Abre los ojos".
@DOSkywalkR5 жыл бұрын
Yeah, it surpassed the original IMHO!
@zvimur5 жыл бұрын
@@DOSkywalkR Because Tom Cruise's character wasn't as deformed as the original?
@damageman2155 жыл бұрын
At 8:50 I never noticed the little laughing until now LOL!!
@bondfall00724 жыл бұрын
The Suspiria remake is my favorite remake of all time. It expands upon the original concept, while faithfully retelling the same story.
@jpstudios-115 жыл бұрын
My favorite remake done right is Peter Jackson's King Kong. It reintroduce a new view of the classic film in a new scope. It paid tribute to the original while portraying it with developed characters and visual effects. I love King Kong.
@AndreasDevig4 жыл бұрын
After 70 years, the effects still looked awful to me. CGI is just not good.
@nobilismaximus5 жыл бұрын
Christ almighty the Predator was shite.......
@thecowofbeef5 жыл бұрын
I’d be kinda interested in seeing a remake fly today. Not because I think it will be good, but just because I just want to see what kind of outcome we’d get.
@randomgirll31235 жыл бұрын
I think remakes that bring a concept and retell it with a modern flair and ideas.
@OutOfNamesToChoose5 жыл бұрын
What's the song at the end of the video?
@richkeyworth855 жыл бұрын
Do It Again by The Chemical Brothers
@OutOfNamesToChoose5 жыл бұрын
@@richkeyworth85 Thank You!
@Rod_Knee5 жыл бұрын
The 2011 "The Thing" was a prequel, NOT a remake. It ended right where the 1982 movie started. The worst thing about it was the horrible CGI. EDIT: By the way, excellent video as always.
@alanwakeish5 жыл бұрын
I'm glad I'm not the only one that gets irritated when you hear a critic say that The Thing 2011 is a remake. It's something that the movie critic Mark Kermode has said about the movie. He also said that Samuel L Jackson's Shaft movie from 2000 was a remake, which it clearly is not, because Richard Roundtree's Shaft makes a couple of cameos in the movie, Samuel L Jackson is playing the nephew of 70's Shaft. It sometimes makes you wonder if they've actually seen the movie they're criticising.
@Rod_Knee5 жыл бұрын
Yes, it can certainly be irritating. With The Thing (2011), I saw the same "review" copied and pasted all around the Internet, saying it was a remake and making remarks that led me to believe the original author had not seen either movie. I actually enjoyed Shaft (2000), but luckily avoided the reviews at the time.
@Rod_Knee5 жыл бұрын
I view it as a direct prequel. Watching the making of etc, the goal of the writers and director was clearly to show what events led up to the 1982 movie.
@danielebowman5 жыл бұрын
@@Rod_Knee But the writers are not adding anything new, they are just adapting the concept nad hacking in plot events to make it a prequel. Much like The Force Awakens was a remake of 'A New Hope', same plot, same planet destroying plot device to fight, same start of a droids going to a desert planet with information a powerful enemy is chasing. It may be set years after the original trilogy and a type of sequel but it's still a remake.
@Rod_Knee5 жыл бұрын
You're right that neither movie added anything new to the narrative. However, I view The Thing 2011 as a prequel and The Force Awakens as an (inferior IMO) sequel. I'd have enjoyed both much more if either had added something new, but calling them remakes conflates them with movies like "The Big Sleep", "A Star is Born" etc. To me, it's like saying 1994's Scarlet was a remake of Gone with the Wind.
@Link03045 жыл бұрын
Love this channel!! Keep up the great work. The smooth voice with insightful points while a lavalamp quietly bubbles really gives off a "intellectual discussion with a good friend in a comfortable setting" vibe. Your videos are great to watch!
@DocFlamingo4 жыл бұрын
I've always thought Zardoz was a movie that could stand a solid remake. There were great ideas there that didn't entirely materialize.
@leej705 жыл бұрын
It's remakes of foreign films that piss me off. Like, Let Me In or The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Both inferior and only seem to exist as a way of making money off morons that can't read.
@blondbraid79865 жыл бұрын
Exactly, it's comparable to the live action Disney remakes of animated movies that only exist because people are nostalgic for the old movies but are too spineless to publicly admit that they like animated movies.
@Louis-wp3fq5 жыл бұрын
Let Me In a fine take on the same source material. I love both movies and couldn't pick one as a favorite if I tried.
@leej705 жыл бұрын
Each to his own. I thought it was totally redundant.
@blondbraid79865 жыл бұрын
As a Swede it frustrates me to no end that whenever a Swedish movie reaches some kind of popularity abroad Hollywood has to do a remake just because they think Americans are too dumb to read or understand something from a different country than their own.
@leej705 жыл бұрын
And people are never going to try watching subtitled movies if they just keep making English versions.
@jerrodbates84805 жыл бұрын
haha this guy is great
@paulbeardsley40954 жыл бұрын
The book version of Bodysnatchers was itself a remake. It was a novella that later got expanded to novel length.
@Mrtorquebowguy5 жыл бұрын
I'm glad the other uploads aren't going on hiatus with the podcast
@patavinity12625 жыл бұрын
You seem to think 'irony' and 'humour' are the same thing. They aren't.
@mistertagomago79745 жыл бұрын
Why do you think he thinks that?
@Strugen.5 жыл бұрын
Just remake a movie & give it a different name. The Force Awakens
@999SickBoy6665 жыл бұрын
Eh, nice try at bandwagon mentality, but no. TFA and Star Wars are two completely different movie - the only similarities (that made a bunch of morons scream "rehash") are cosmetic.
@Strugen.5 жыл бұрын
So when JJ even admitted it himself, I guess he was lying
@999SickBoy6665 жыл бұрын
@@Strugen. Again, nice try, but it's like people trying to use a decontestualized bit from something Mark Hamill said to "prove" that he "hated" _The Last Jedi_ . Abrams never admitted to "remaking a movie & giving it a different name". Also, there's no need to rely on anyone's statements: _Star Wars_ 1977 was entirely Death Star-centered. Bar the death of his uncles, Luke basically doesn't have an arc: at the end of the movie he's the same guy he was at the beginning and, in fact, the only one who has something of a character arc is Han Solo - but that arc won't really pay off until _Empire_ so it's kind of irrelevant. In _The Force Awakens_ SKB is there just to have something to blow up at the end: Rey's journey, her character arc, her relationship with Finn and Han Solo and - marginally - KR are the core of the movie. Also, Finn has a character arc, so does Han and so does Kylo. But, because there is a sand planet, a spherical weapon of mass destruction, a protagonist wearing white-ish clothes and a bad guy in black robes, a bunch of internet morons decided they were entitled to call it a rehash.
@Strugen.5 жыл бұрын
@999SickBoy666 nice try for you nerd. You have been watching to many hello greedo videos or something
@999SickBoy6665 жыл бұрын
@@Strugen. So, you try (and fail) to talk about Star Wars, you get schooled because of your complete inability to produce even a single argument in support of your bandwagon-mentality based theory and you try to get out of it by calling people "nerd"? You should've told you were 12, I would've simply ignored you :-)
@cesartapia6104 жыл бұрын
I would love a video about The Fly and The Thing remakes and how they improved upon the original concepts. Those seem to me like prime candidates by your standards, George.
@JohnnyBurnes5 жыл бұрын
I can't wait for the remake of Getting Remakes Right!
@norwegianblue20175 жыл бұрын
Once again, you offer a really great break down on what makes a good remake. I have four rules myself. 1. I feel that about every 30 years there is an opportunity to make a remake of a good film, as long as it is not just a "rehash" as you say. 2. Don't remake truly iconic films that aren't asking for a remake. That could be everything from The Godfather to Caddyshack to Apocalypse Now. 3. Sometimes there are really bad movies that were based on good material and absolutely should have another version made. I'm thinking of movies like Dredd vs. Judge Dredd. 4. Don't remake a foreign film that was well done recently just to make it in a new language and be more commercial and with a bigger budget. If you've ever seen the American version of The Vanishing vs the original European version, that's exactly what I am talking about.
@zoesdada89234 жыл бұрын
The second "true grit" was awesome
@theiofthebeholder95535 жыл бұрын
Krull, Forbidden Planet, Heavy Metal, Barbarella, Enemy Mine, Shogun Assassin, Baron Munchausen, Labyrinth. I think all of these would benefit from a competent makeover and still carry their essence.
@danielebowman5 жыл бұрын
Barbarella is essentially a meaningless Sci-fi soft core porn flick as much as I love it. Not sure a remake can add to it's legacy as it's plot is essentially the main character being sexually abused in various Sci-fi/fantasy ways but it all being played as a cheesy flick. Can't see that going well in today's environment and the title character essentially had no character to be interesting to see further adventures. As fr the rest, it would depend on what the director and writer have in their minds to explore the concepts. Baron Munchausen's "moral" that fantasy is as important as reality and keeps us young can't really be re-told and add much to that concept.There isn't much of a creative reasosn to remake it, except to "Modernise" the film.
@blackderby805 жыл бұрын
Heavy metal could do with a sequel done in the same style as the original, an anthology of loosely connected stories, each done in a different style of animation. The sequel we got, heavy metal 2000, wasn't bad, but it was a single feature-length story. I used to have the issue of heavy metal where they debuted a lot of simon bisley's concept art and ideas for the film, many of which didn't make it to the finished product, which is a shame, as they were pretty cool.
@promontorium4 жыл бұрын
One large reason remakes exist is never mentioned (by anyone, not this video specifically). Actors, directors, etc. are professionals who love the craft and want the opportunity to have a go at beloved stories. If actors had their way, they'd do the same movies every year. It's why Romeo and Juliet is done incessantly, across continents. Every actor wants their chance to play an iconic role, a role that isn't just great but is already imbedded in our culture. That's part of what actors love about acting, sharing and being a part of a larger cultural realm. To play the role or be in the beloved story makes you a part of it. This same feeling exists with directors, producers, etc. There's something about the nature of performing arts, people want a chance to try their hand at performing something they already know touches people.
@Alexis-hx3yd5 жыл бұрын
The Mummy remake (Brendon Fraser) was great fun.
@mikerodgers76204 жыл бұрын
The Thing made in 2011 was a prequel. Those events happened at the Norwegian science station.
@TheRausing15 жыл бұрын
I feel I’m the only person who liked the Nicole Kidman body snatchers. As a kid, I loved the first two. Watching the later film, I felt a similar sense of dread that the other two gave me. Also the ending, where her husband reads the newspaper and all the crime and suffering that’s going on in the world, implying that maybe it would’ve been better for the human race to allow the snatchers to control them.
@bex_d5 жыл бұрын
The Wizard of Oz (1939) and Dracula (1931) are great remakes that rarely anyone mentions when talking about remakes.
@bex_d5 жыл бұрын
Also House of Wax (1953) and Ben-Hur (1959)
@munjee25 жыл бұрын
Well the first two becuase they are based on books really weren't that inspired by the previous films the other two , yeah I ago no clue
@bex_d5 жыл бұрын
Munjee Syed You could also say that about The Thing (1982).
@collegeman19884 жыл бұрын
Currently, remakes are being produced more frequently than ever because movie studios have run out of ideas and also want to reuse a successful story that has been done before because it’s viewed as a safe bet. If a movie runs the risk of being a flop because it is new, movie studios are more inclined to turn it down because there’s just too much money at risk if it does flop, but that leaves audiences with old and stale rehashes of what they’ve seen before. Probably the most effective remake I’ve ever seen of a movie was The Fly directed by David Cronenberg. He didn’t like The Fly made in 1958 because the scientist’s head and an appendage were switched with the insect’s head and appendage, which looked cheap and goofy. Instead, he created a story where Seth Brundle’s decision to teleport himself without the proper precautions or testing did not lead to immediately noticeable consequences, but after being in denial that something was wrong, upon further examination, Brundle learned he made a tragic and irreversible mistake.
@redrackham68125 жыл бұрын
One important factor in the success, commercial and artistic, of a remake is how much time has passed since the original, although time here is really just a crude metric for familiarity. If the bulk of your audience has little or no familiarity with the original, then they will judge the remake on its own merits. If the audience is very familiar with the original, then they will inevitably compare the original to the remake. Knowing that, the filmmakers won't be able, if the audience is very familiar with the original, to get away from the original creatively speaking, and the remake will feel dull and derivative.
@occultnightingale11064 жыл бұрын
The best way to do a remake is to either expand on a concept that worked, fleshing it out a lot more than the original did, or to simply tweak a concept that didn't work so it has a better chance the second time around.
@apollion8885 жыл бұрын
Your intellectual understanding of cinema is obvious and I hope it translates well into the effectiveness necessary for actual film production. Best of luck with the Kickstarter campaign.
@michaelemouse15 жыл бұрын
Note how most of the movies which were successfully remade were originally before the late 60s-70s, when mise-en-scène/cinematography/direction, special effects and acting were mainly borrowed from theater.
@volodymyrbilyk5555 жыл бұрын
You should do a video about Cronenberg's remake of The Fly. There is a lot of stuff you have mentioned shown in practice.
@RonWylie-gk5lc4 жыл бұрын
True Grit was a masterwork, everything about it was superb, photography direction acting and everything else was just wonderful, Young Hailey was robbed for the Oscar, I have never seen a newcomer master a part so well.
@Kevin_Street5 жыл бұрын
The big problem with remakes today is that audiences still have easy access to the originals. The second Body Snatcher film was about twenty years after the original, and that worked fine because there was a whole generation of moviegoers who had grown up since 1956 who had never seen it. (A few may have seen it on late night TV, but they were a minority.) The second Robocop film came out twenty-seven years after the first one, but it flopped because modern audiences have all seen the original on DVD and BluRay. (Or nowadays streaming.) In the past a remake could just update the concept and be successful, but today we can easily compare both versions, so the remake has to actively compete for survival against the original. The audience needs a reason to spend money on the new version instead of just rewatching the old one.