Name A Remake Better Than Original?

Red Dragon.
I perfur the original War of the WorlRAB. I hated the remake on so many levels. I wish they had just made it like the book, based at the turn of the 19th century. And no tom Cruize.
 
DepenRAB I'd go with Dawn of the Dead, The Thing is definite, possibly Gone In 60 SeconRAB, The Thomas Crown Affair, Various reworkings of the Dracula & Frankenstein stories and King Kong.
 
It's a good attempt but the original is still the best. And the same goes for Texas Chainsaw Massacre

No-one's mentioned The Departed yet. Haven't seen Infernal Affairs myself.
 
Can't comment on TCM....but Dawn of the Dead was absolutely brilliant, the original by George Romero, who owns the zombie genre. The remake just lacked the charm and the George Romero magic.
 
Are you ignorant or just trying to stir up crap? I've already stated in my first post that remakes are generally inferior to their originals (including Planet of the Apes, which was awful), just that Dawn of the Dead was better for me than the original which is a rare thing.



And NO I'm NOT joking! If you don't like to read peoples opinions that don't match your own then why come into a thread asking people for opinions on a subject?

:rolleyes:
 
Calm down.

I didn't detest the remake, but the original appears to be univerally superior, with only a handful of people disagreeing. The remake was watchable, but I would struggle to sit through it again - where as the original can be replayed over again.
 
We talking about the recent remake vs the 1930s movie?

I think its a bit of an unfair comparison! I found the remake to be a bit rubbish in any case, but have not seen the original in its entirety. Obviously a film like that is going to be a lot based on special effects....so the 1930s version will struggle.
 
I am calm, but if I'd said the moon is made of cheese in my opinion, you'd be right to call me crazy. Taste and opinion in film is down to personal preference, not fact. You think the original DOTD is better, I may disagree but I'll keep my own opinion that the remake is better and I won't make a fuss about it or belittle your opinion.

You act like the greatest movie critic while the rest of us know nothing. We are all equal and have differing opinions. It's about respecting that some people will like things that others of us hate. Too bad, get used to it... I hate American remakes of Japanese horror but if someone says they loved the Sarah Michelle Gellar Grudge, so be it.

As for the King Kong remake. The CGI is what made it, it entertained but the original utilises story and filmmaking over effects which is why it's more respected.
 
Who ever said that? Not one dead body has ever got up off the ground in real life (for obvious reasons i.e zombies are fiction) so how can you tell it won't be able to run? Don't say rigor mortis, that wears off after several hours. Anyway, running zombies are FAR more terrifying to me than stupid, dumb zombies that you could simply stroll past on a sunny day. Zombies eat and crave meat, that makes them predators. And a scary predator is one that is fast.

In my opinion, the Dawn of the Dead remake not only improved upon the original but also seperated itself enough to be a damn good stand alone horror flick.
 
I think a better example of a game that demonstrates slow zombies are terrifying is Doom 3 for the PC. Play that game with all the lights off at 3am and you'll get more paranoia than if you'd just drunk 20 litres of bhang lassi.

28 Days Later definitely does the 'athletic' zombie thing the best though.

I personally prefer the re-make of DOTD, but obviously the original is a classic; and arguably the most influential zombie film ever.

Generally, I fully expect remakes to be appalling but there are some good-uns out there.

King Kong (2005/2006?) was a decent film but so much extra was added to the remake it can't really be compared to the original, IMO.

At the end of the day if a classic is THAT good, no-one will want to remake it for fear of complete catastrophe; although that said money and franchise does usually take precedence over artistic rights these days.

It all comes down to opinion, so no-one is right or wrong really.
 
Good call! It was nice of Sam Raimi to remake his original film when he'd got a bit more money - then he could really do what he wanted to do!
 
Dare I say 'War of the WorlRAB' and 'Ocean's Eleven'. Compare the remakes to the originals and you may find the remakes are the lesser of two evils.
 
You think current films won't date?
I saw the original DOTD recently and it hadn't dated at all in my opinion. When DOTD was released it was regarded as a bit of a shocker, but thankfully it works on many different levels, so there's still a lot going for it even though it might not shock so much with todays film-goers. The scenes in the tenement building at the beginning are still pretty shocking though - much more so than the remake.
I'm not going to comment on the Frankenstein / Dracula films - don't want to start another fight!
 
Back
Top