Remakes and sequels: how much is too much?

I honestly don't even have the words anymore—it has truly gone too far. Hollywood is stuck in such a massive creative drought that I’m genuinely unsure when they'll ever find their way out. Is there really such a desperate need for all these remakes? Is it absolutely necessary to churn out endless sequels, prequels, spin-offs, or whatever else they call them these days? Look, I get it—it's all about the bottom line—but all they're doing is conditioning audiences to accept these kinds of productions, so maybe people stop looking for anything else? They just mash up ideas from old movies and call it something new. Perhaps the answer lies in the influence of television, where programming mostly consists of endless series, soap operas, and similar nonsense—now that same trend is bleeding right onto the big screen.
On top of that, there's this total lack of creativity in the storytelling and scripts; they try to mask it with flashy new technology and special effects, making everything look more and more like a visual circus.
Movies are meant to be entertainment, sure, but they should be more than just that. Unfortunately, the "fun" aspect has completely taken over, and pure profit has become the driving force—a greed that has swallowed even those who used to be creative, turning them into mere puppets for big capital.

I was actually posting under my old username in this Passage film thread, but I'm heading out now. Still, I'm glad to see this topic getting reopened again.

Remakes are totally justified if the original was subpar. Just look at the new Batman series, Star Trek, 3:10 to Yuma, Cape Fear, Heat, Insomnia, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Ocean's Eleven, The Thing, The Last of the Mohicans, and plenty of others I won't bother listing right now...
Remakes have been popping up constantly over the last fifty years. Sure, there are more of them today than ever before, but if the quality is actually good, then why not? Besides, I can sit through the same movie ten times if I love it, which is something you just can't do with a remake.

Karen Smith9 said:I honestly don't even have the words anymore—it has truly gone too far. Hollywood is stuck in such a massive creative drought that I’m genuinely unsure when they'll ever find their way out. Is there really such a desperate need for all these remakes? Is it absolutely necessary to churn out endless sequels, prequels, spin-offs, or whatever else they call them these days? Look, I get it—it's all about the bottom line—but all they're doing is conditioning audiences to accept these kinds of productions, so maybe people stop looking for anything else? They just mash up ideas from old movies and call it something new. Perhaps the answer lies in the influence of television, where programming mostly consists of endless series, soap operas, and similar nonsense—now that same trend is bleeding right onto the big screen.
On top of that, there's this total lack of creativity in the storytelling and scripts; they try to mask it with flashy new technology and special effects, making everything look more and more like a visual circus.
Movies are meant to be entertainment, sure, but they should be more than just that. Unfortunately, the "fun" aspect has completely taken over, and pure profit has become the driving force—a greed that has swallowed even those who used to be creative, turning them into mere puppets for big capital.

Maybe it's just because back in the day, they couldn't express themselves through all those fancy new effects they have access to now.

Personally, I’m not feeling it. I don't know why, maybe because I belong to a younger generation. It feels like the actual story and the soul of the movie gets tossed aside to make room for everything else. It used to be that legends were made through powerhouse acting; nowadays, they're manufactured by being cast in massive blockbusters (or at least the ones with the biggest ad spend)—not that it's a rule, just my two cents.

I’ve sat through millions of movies where everyone else is losing their minds, but I'm just sitting there feeling meh, because instead of the visuals elevating the film, they’re practically shoving themselves in your face.

I get the sense that someone wants people walking out of the theater saying, "wowww, did you see that shot?!" rather than actually talking about the heart of the movie, the characters, their vibes, or the plot.

At the end of the day, I shudder to think what would happen if they tried to make a movie today starring someone like Al Pacino or De Niro. Even the masses can stomach these superhero schemes, but I think trying to go back to that level of acting would be total cinematic suicide.😁

Honestly, I think all these remakes and prequels are complete garbage. We have all these massive books, myths, legends, stories, fairy tales, real-life experiences, and screenwriters' imaginations—and then, at the end of the day, we just get sequels to existing movies. Making remakes and prequels is just nonsensical to me.

Sophia Grant39 said:Remakes are totally justified if the original was subpar. Just look at the new Batman series, Star Trek, 3:10 to Yuma, Cape Fear, Heat, Insomnia, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Ocean's Eleven, The Thing, The Last of the Mohicans, and plenty of others I won't bother listing right now...
Remakes have been popping up constantly over the last fifty years. Sure, there are more of them today than ever before, but if the quality is actually good, then why not? Besides, I can sit through the same movie ten times if I love it, which is something you just can't do with a remake.

There aren't many remakes out there that actually beat the original, and I definitely wouldn't argue that the remake of The Thing is any better than Carpenter's original with Kurt Russell—unless you're counting those tiny little details where they used CGI, I guess...

brightseal3 said:There aren't many remakes out there that actually beat the original, and I definitely wouldn't argue that the remake of The Thing is any better than Carpenter's original with Kurt Russell—unless you're counting those tiny little details where they used CGI, I guess...

The Thing is actually just Carpenter's remake of the 1951 original. This one from last year is just a prequel to Carpenter's 1982 version.

Sophia Grant39 said:The Thing is actually just Carpenter's remake of the 1951 original. This one from last year is just a prequel to Carpenter's 1982 version.

It’s honestly wild how absurd this whole situation has become...

It just confuses people. Honestly, I don't care. If I feel like watching it, fine, if not, whatever... the original isn't going anywhere. Sometimes a remake is actually better than the original anyway.

Why not? Even if everything comes down to money, why shouldn't we tell a solid story using today's technology?

- I'm really looking forward to Total Recall; it’s a great story with wasted potential if you strip away Arnie's constant shouting.
- Raimi's Spider-Man is absolute garbage where every female character just turns into a damzel in distress for Spidey to save. The casting is terrible. Forget about the love interest when you're dealing with Dunst's character.
- I haven't seen a decent Superman sequel since the Reeves era.
- RoboCop is one of those childhood favorites I'd gladly rewatch in high definition.
- Mad Max might not be a total reboot, but its post-apocalyptic world is so unique—there's no reason not to revisit it.

I have absolutely nothing against remakes of movies that are meant for entertainment anyway. The original always remains the original.

John Peterson3 said:Why not? Even if everything comes down to money, why shouldn't we tell a solid story using today's technology?

- I'm really looking forward to Total Recall; it’s a great story with wasted potential if you strip away Arnie's constant shouting.
- Raimi's Spider-Man is absolute garbage where every female character just turns into a damzel in distress for Spidey to save. The casting is terrible. Forget about the love interest when you're dealing with Dunst's character.
- I haven't seen a decent Superman sequel since the Reeves era.
- RoboCop is one of those childhood favorites I'd gladly rewatch in high definition.
- Mad Max might not be a total reboot, but its post-apocalyptic world is so unique—there's no reason not to revisit it.

I have absolutely nothing against remakes of movies that are meant for entertainment anyway. The original always remains the original.

That’s exactly my point... it's endless recycling, like a landfill stretching out to the horizon. The most tragic part is that they even touch the good movies—it loses all sense of dignity and credibility, if there was any to begin with in these modern attempts.

Look, I'm not telling you how to live your life. If remakes and prequels irritate you that much—honestly, just steer clear. There are plenty of film industries outside of Hollywood churning out incredibly imaginative movies with fresh ideas.

Besides, how exactly does a remake hurt the original? I don't really watch them—and frankly, they’re usually garbage—but occasionally they spark an interest in the original, which is a win. Sometimes I'm even curious about a new take on an old concept. Now, I'll just blather on aimlessly... I'm a huge fan of the Halloween series, and I actually had fun seeing how Rob Zombie played around with the whole concept. Quality-wise, the movie was miles below Carpenter's original, but I enjoyed myself and satisfied that fanboy itch for a new Michael Myers adventure. 😁

And thank God, there are enough good movies to throw at you. Even if you watched five films every single day, you'd still be lagging behind and wouldn't even scratch the surface.

Damn it, Hollywood is built on money, and that’s exactly why it survives—that magic piece of paper. For sure. But, thanks for nothing, true cinematic art doesn't depend on Hollywood. 🙂

vividmarlin11 said:Look, I'm not telling you how to live your life. If remakes and prequels irritate you that much—honestly, just steer clear. There are plenty of film industries outside of Hollywood churning out incredibly imaginative movies with fresh ideas.

Besides, how exactly does a remake hurt the original? I don't really watch them—and frankly, they’re usually garbage—but occasionally they spark an interest in the original, which is a win. Sometimes I'm even curious about a new take on an old concept. Now, I'll just blather on aimlessly... I'm a huge fan of the Halloween series, and I actually had fun seeing how Rob Zombie played around with the whole concept. Quality-wise, the movie was miles below Carpenter's original, but I enjoyed myself and satisfied that fanboy itch for a new Michael Myers adventure. 😁

And thank God, there are enough good movies to throw at you. Even if you watched five films every single day, you'd still be lagging behind and wouldn't even scratch the surface.

Damn it, Hollywood is built on money, and that’s exactly why it survives—that magic piece of paper. For sure. But, thanks for nothing, true cinematic art doesn't depend on Hollywood. 🙂

I know exactly what you mean, though. There was a time when Hollywood actually had some credibility and true artistry... and there really were great films back then. I agree with you—there's definitely a sense of loss there...

Hollywood just churns out whatever the audience is hungry for. Trying to sell serious, original cinema? That’s a massive uphill battle.

Let them suffer if it bothers someone.

I honestly don't get why people watch this stuff.

Lisa Ross65 said:Hollywood just churns out whatever the audience is hungry for. Trying to sell serious, original cinema? That’s a massive uphill battle.

Actually, it's the other way around. Everything people claim to love—whether it's food, music, or movies—they love because marketing hammered it into their heads.

Very few people actually have an original thought. Most people are just programmed.

I’m starting to become immune to mass stupidity here. Well, not entirely... and I honestly can't believe how many people are posting fake credentials in these movie threads. They're such liars that I don't even bother engaging with them anymore, even when they bring up the classic titles everyone swears by.

I’m taking this opportunity to request a new sub-forum within film specifically to ghettoize all the sequels, remakes, and blockbusters—basically everything that's just waiting to be filmed and already has its own thread. I’d also like to ask the mods if I could dump all those annoying topics into one stinky little corner, stuff like the greatest movie in history, which actor's brother is actually the best ever and other garbage: which Batman was the best, which Godfather, which whatever... thanks in advance.

That’s not very Christian of you, Henry Campbell5. 😢 Not that you’re probably too rational to be a Christian anyway, right?

Regarding the topic at hand: remakes, sequels, and all that stuff that bugs you—they'll keep filming them as long as they make money, and damn it, they're making money.

It depends...

Parodies have honestly just gone downhill. I don't think I can even bother with them in theaters anymore; it's straight to DVD for me...