Original vs. Remake: Which one actually holds up?

Whether a remake turns out to be a hit or a total flop, it always ends up breathing new life into the original film. I suppose there’s definitely some value in that.

Chloe Nguyen said:It seems to me that remakes are, for the most part, significantly inferior to the original films.
I suppose there is a certain argument to be made that Tui tends to execute things with much more finesse, though I suspect we might occasionally encounter a remake so vastly superior to its predecessor that the general public remains entirely oblivious to the fact that a remake even exists—one might think of instances like The Thing, The Fly, Cape Fear, or Scarface.

I was actually just about to start listing those exact films the moment I laid eyes on this thread. 😁

I somehow totally blanked on mentioning The Thing—which, honestly, is one of my absolute favorites—so that immediately made me think of Village of the Damned. You’ve got John Carpenter again, and another remake of an old classic, but... I don't know, he just didn't quite hit the mark with the second one the way he did with the first. It's funny though, because even the first one was pretty much branded a total flop when it first came out. I guess time really does have a way of fixing its own mistakes sometimes...

not sure
honestly, I’m more of a remake guy... like, Halloween by Rob Zombie? Way better than the original for me. Same goes for Friday the 13th... ☕

rustyraven4 said:not sure
honestly, I’m more of a remake guy... like, Halloween by Rob Zombie? Way better than the original for me. Same goes for Friday the 13th... ☕

I won't say this is my first comment on the subject, but it’s one of those rare times someone actually suggests that Zombie managed to outdo Carpenter. Look, the original Halloween is a total cult classic, no question—but in my opinion, Zombie just needlessly watered down the whole vibe by trying way too hard to explain why Michael Myers is the way he is. It’s all just confusing... and now they're gearing up for a sequel, planning both a remake and some original "sequels" too. As for Friday the 13th... mmm, I'll hold my tongue so I don't start a war with the fans, but let's be real: the original flick is pretty rough, which basically practically invited someone to make a remake. On that point, I think we can all agree...

Honestly, Halloween by Rob Zombie is absolute garbage... and as for Friday the 13th, I’m not even going to touch it; I saw the original once and that was more than enough. That first film was perfect, and I have no desire to ruin that experience for myself.

I can’t recall a single time where a remake actually beat out the original. Every few years, we get some tired reimagining, like a fresh take on "Assault on Precinct 13," or... I can't even think of another one. The last remake I sat through was "The Day the Earth Stood Still," which wasn't even over-the-top; it was just plain bad.
The whole point of these remakes is that there's no new idea behind them—just a blatant cash grab built on old nostalgia. At this rate, we'll be seeing more remakes than original films every year, which is pretty depressing.

Honestly, the most brainless, totally pointless remake ever made has to be Psycho Gus by David Van Sant.
I mean, David Van Sant is such an incredibly talented and powerful director... I just can't wrap my head around what he was thinking or what he was going through to even decide to do this...

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:Honestly, the most brainless, totally pointless remake ever made has to be Psycho Gus by David Van Sant.
I mean, David Van Sant is such an incredibly talented and powerful director... I just can't wrap my head around what he was thinking or what he was going through to even decide to do this...

Facts. I sat through that movie and I’m genuinely stumped as to what he was trying to achieve with such a frame-for-frame imitation. The original is a classic—if you aren't going to actually refresh the vision or at least give it some new flavor, you probably shouldn't have touched it in the first place.

Jason Clark4 said:I can’t recall a single time where a remake actually beat out the original. Every few years, we get some tired reimagining, like a fresh take on "Assault on Precinct 13," or... I can't even think of another one. The last remake I sat through was "The Day the Earth Stood Still," which wasn't even over-the-top; it was just plain bad.
The whole point of these remakes is that there's no new idea behind them—just a blatant cash grab built on old nostalgia. At this rate, we'll be seeing more remakes than original films every year, which is pretty depressing.

Ah, John Carpenter... looks like the guy finally lost it once half his filmography had already been remade (we've got Fog in the mix too) and then there was Attack... which was a decent enough refresh, though I still lean toward the old version. A quick buck here and there, nothing fancy, just a bunch of unknown actors, but hey, the movie still hits the spot. They announced a remake of Escape from New York a couple of years back, so who knows... maybe he'll live long enough to see every single one of his movies get ripped off.

When it comes to Raimi, I’ll admit I only really dig his more low-key stuff—take Ben-Hur, for instance.
+
The Thing

I think there might be another two or three floating around in my head—I just can't pull them to the surface right now... let's say Invasions of the Body Snatchers.

Lawrence Booth2 said:When it comes to Raimi, I’ll admit I only really dig his more low-key stuff—take Ben-Hur, for instance.
+
The Thing

I think there might be another two or three floating around in my head—I just can't pull them to the surface right now... let's say Invasions of the Body Snatchers.

Which invasion are we talking about? There are like three different versions floating around... but honestly, it’s gotta be The Thing. No contest.

Ah, yes, another one just popped into my head.

The absolute titan himself, Alfred Hitchcock, actually decided to remake his own film, The Man Who Knew Too Much. And if you ask me, the remake actually edges out the original.

velvetcrane57 said:Ah, yes, another one just popped into my head.

The absolute titan himself, Alfred Hitchcock, actually decided to remake his own film, The Man Who Knew Too Much. And if you ask me, the remake actually edges out the original.

I've heard people talk about that, but I'll be honest—I haven't sat down with either version yet. You did, though, give me a solid heads-up that they're starting—or maybe already are—filming a remake of his The Birds. The original is pretty terrifying to me, but since George Clooney is supposed to be in this new one, I've got some mixed feelings about how good it might actually turn out...

velvetcrane57 said:Honestly, Halloween by Rob Zombie is absolute garbage... and as for Friday the 13th, I’m not even going to touch it; I saw the original once and that was more than enough. That first film was perfect, and I have no desire to ruin that experience for myself.

Honestly, I actually liked Zombie's Halloween better than the original. But hey, that's just my take... whatever.

But look, don't write off the "Friday" flick just yet because—I was literally reading about this in the news yesterday—it isn't some straight-up remake. According to the article, they're basically stitching together a whole new story using bits and pieces from several different "Friday the 13th" movies, so it won't really be like the first one at all.

Anyway, I can't say I love or hate remakes. Some hit the mark, some miss completely, and others are just totally pointless.
I seriously don't get remakes like The Hitcher. Like, why even bother filming the exact same movie just with a new cast? The director didn't bring anything new to the table. What's even the point?
Now, I do dig Japanese horror remakes. They just work better for me. For example, I think "The Ring" is way better and scarier than the original "Ringu," and "Dark Water" landed much better for me too than the Japanese version... whereas the remake of that awesome Spanish film REC feels totally unnecessary, and I have zero interest in even trying to watch it...

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:Honestly, the most brainless, totally pointless remake ever made has to be Psycho Gus by David Van Sant.
I mean, David Van Sant is such an incredibly talented and powerful director... I just can't wrap my head around what he was thinking or what he was going through to even decide to do this...

Wasn't his goal just to introduce the movie to younger generations who would otherwise never watch it because it's black and white?🤷

Personally, I’m not one for remakes, especially when the original stands on its own. If you've got actual legends in the cast, there’s really no reason to touch it. That said, exceptions exist; occasionally, an old classic might actually benefit from a modern touch. We could dive into specific titles later, but consider this: can a modern version of Spartak starring Goran Visnjic ever truly compete with the original Spartak? Or a new take on Samson and Delilah compared to the first... it's almost laughable.

crimsondriver54 said:Personally, I’m not one for remakes, especially when the original stands on its own. If you've got actual legends in the cast, there’s really no reason to touch it. That said, exceptions exist; occasionally, an old classic might actually benefit from a modern touch. We could dive into specific titles later, but consider this: can a modern version of Spartak starring Goran Visnjic ever truly compete with the original Spartak? Or a new take on Samson and Delilah compared to the first... it's almost laughable.

And honestly, the people making these things are fully aware of that—they'll tell you right out of the gate that it's just a "TV product," basically trying to lower your expectations before you even hit play. For me, speaking of TV, I actually preferred the newer miniseries version of 'Salem's Lot. Don't get me wrong, massive props to Tobe Hooper and the original, but sometimes the older stuff just feels a bit dated...

When it comes to remakes, I think Rob totally missed the mark with his version of Halloween—it just didn't work for me at all.
Out of the ones I've checked out, I actually enjoyed things like TMC from 2003 and The Hills Have Eyes. I'm planning on watching Friday tonight, so we'll see how that goes.

briskhound2 said:I've heard people talk about that, but I'll be honest—I haven't sat down with either version yet. You did, though, give me a solid heads-up that they're starting—or maybe already are—filming a remake of his The Birds. The original is pretty terrifying to me, but since George Clooney is supposed to be in this new one, I've got some mixed feelings about how good it might actually turn out...

If you found those birds to be a poor cinematic experience, then I wouldn't suggest looking at the old cult classics at all; stick strictly to the remakes. Personally, I won't even touch a remake, because if someone is merely rehashing or pilfering from Hitchcock, I have absolutely no desire to watch their work. The last thing I sat through was that absolute garbage, Disturb. It felt like nothing more than a blatant rip-off of the brilliant Rear Window. And I’ve heard that even Eagle Eye is a total plagiarism—it practically steals from Kubrick and Hitchcock combined! Some people truly possess no sense of shame. Honestly, I'd love to see them held accountable.
But I digress....

It just occurred to me that there is also a remake of Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder... it's called A Perfect Murder, and it isn't actually bad. I see someone on IMDb claiming it’s significantly better than the original... which is nonsense, it doesn't come close, but it isn't complete trash either....