Annoying as remarks are (for us film buRAB

), do they have any value?
What are the pros and cons of a remake?
To be honest I can't think of any pros, really.
Unless it's an exceptionally well made remake that has the ability to eclipse it's predecessor both critically and commercially, I can't really see the point of remaking a film.
I mentioned in my previous post about how they were almost 'money back guarantees' for the industry but I no longer believe that this is the case (I may well be wrong).
I mean, did the recent version of 'Halloween' make more money at the box office than the original? Did it make a vast amount of money at all? Do mediocre remakes (like The Fog) get bums on seats at the end of the day? I haven't got a clue
So, you hear that your favorite film of all time is gonna be remade into a multi-million pound Hollywood blockbuster. 'Great!' you think, 'maybe no everyone will realise what a great film the original was!' No chance.
It's almost like the industry tries everything it can to bury the original under the carpet. As much as I loved there make of Dawn of the Dead, did it really bring a new audience to the Romero films? I doubt it.
John Waters sums it up best, he says that when he's doing public appearances now people come rushing up to him saying how much they love his films (ie. Hairspray). He says 'Really? You like my films? Did you actually enjoy Pink Flamingos? I don't think so!'. His new found audience hasn't got a clue about John Waters.
Occasionally some remakes are very good and will no doubt become classics in their own right but they are few and far between. And with many of them pretty much now going straight to DVD, how much long can Hollywood flog this dead horse?