FAQ   Search the Forums   Log in to check your private messages

Recent Headlines

Recent Reviews


Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
Forums Index -> Night of the Living Newbie -> A warm hello to all
Kairo
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:32 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 6

Titular greetings to everybody here. I am one of the undoubtedly many avid DC readers from far away. The Netherlands, in my case. That's Europe to the geographically challenged.

First off, my warmest and sincerest compliments for DC's content. It's one of my steady online read fixes, and I hope the staff has as much fun writing it as I have reading it. Reviews, news, interviews and what not, DC offers everything a horror fan could possibly want, and then some. Kudos. Bravo.

I am not familiar with the community here. Likewise, the community is equally unfamiliar with me so a little introduction seems in order. To get the obvious out of the way, of course, I'm a horror fan. My favorite directors are many, but to name a few: John Carpenter, Kim Ki-Duk, Dario Argento, Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Dante Tomaselli, George A. Romero, David Cronenberg and David Lynch. Some of my favorite movies: The Isle, Prince of Darkness, Mulholland Drive, The Serpent And The Rainbow, Cloverfield, Videodrome, Dawn of the Dead (Argento's cut!), A Tale of Two Sisters etcetera.

I have a reason for introducing myself here after my years of silent lurking. Actually, it's a question. Or an issue. Or something. Recent HW releases of movies like Prom Night, One Missed Call and Shutter seems to have intensified the rants and litanies against and about what seems to be a profitable curse in movieland: remakes. The online stance is uniform and firm: everybody loathes them. And I'm wondering just how justified that really is. How come it's artistically perfectly legitimate to base a movie on a novel, historic events, someone's life, dreams or whatever, as long as it's not another movie? What's so basically wrong about adapting a classic? Or just giving an older movie a contemporary work-over?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RingoJ
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:19 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 28514
Location: Flo-Town,Alabama

Sup.

As for your remake question, I think most people see it as "if it isn't broken, don't fix it."
_________________
"Sigh. Malachi, Conan is a fictional character, Dungeon Masters are real, hard-working people..." - Chainsaw
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Freak Monkey
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:21 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Posts: 72

First off, welcome! I am new to DC myself, and a fan of pretty much all the directors you list.

Obviously I can only speak for myself and my other horror-loving friends that do not post here, but I believe that a large part of the problem with remakes is a frustration in the lack of creativity. And it seems to span all genres of film. Allow me to indulge in a bit of a rant regarding a film that, while not horror, I certainly found horrible: The Producers.

Not all that long ago really, Mel Brooks made a movie called The Producers. It was very funny. Then, decades later, a Broadway play was developed based on the film. This play was also funny. Then came the NEW movie, based on the play that was based on the OLD movie. Really? Because the entire concept seems even more ridiculous to me than Matthew Broderick's painfully awkward and awful impression of Gene Wilder, which is far easier to view from a distance on stage than larger than life on the big screen.

In the world of horror I will give you an example that I have noticed many of the people here take great delight in shitting on; Rob Zombie's Halloween.

I happen to be fond of Rob Zombie's "House of 1,000 Corpses" and "The Devil's Rejects". Unfortunately, I am also quite fond of John Carpenter's Halloween and the supernatural entity that is Michael Myers. I'm sure one could argue that the social trends of the late 70's and 80's gave rise to the unkillable monsters like Michael, Jason and Freddy and that in this day and age, the horror that real people are capable of is what comes out more often in film.

Well that's just fine, but for me personally I'd much rather see some fresh, new examples of modern horror than to have the movies I hold in the highest nostalgic regard be re-tooled for the next generation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Freak Monkey
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:24 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Posts: 72

RingoJ wrote:
Sup.

As for your remake question, I think most people see it as "if it isn't broken, don't fix it."


Of course, those more well-versed than I am can sum it up in just once sentence. Mr. Green
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kairo
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 9:15 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 6

RingoJ wrote:
As for your remake question, I think most people see it as "if it isn't broken, don't fix it."
Here's where my confusion lies. I fail to see how a remake would somehow break the original.

@Freak Monkey: I found RZ's Halloween frustrating, in that it could have been so much better had RZ kept the nihilistic mayhem up that he gave us in his other movies, and in Halloween's first reel. Sadly, the whole romp sort of deflated as it dragged on.

Invasion Of The Body Snatchers is another fine example of a movie that gets an 'update' each decade or so. The thematic subtext is so strong and metaphoric that it lends itself perfectly for adaptation to whatever madness permeates the news on any given moment. What's left, in my humble opinion, is the bare skills of the moviemakers. Siegel? Great and original, but in all truthfulness also dated and campy. Kaufman? He really made the better movie. Ferrara? Original take on a pre-existing theme, one could even argue that it's not even a remake, and otherwise a fine movie. Hirschbiegel? More drama than horror, and I wasn't moved by it.

I remember how the announcement of Zack Snyder's DOTD remake was received. Bloody rape and murder, petitions and rants the lengths of which one could easily wallpaper a ballroom with, to protect a sacred masterpiece from being touched. In the end it turned out fine, simply because Snyder made an okay movie.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating or endorsing remakes. In fact, I totally agree: nothing beats a fresh idea well executed. But Prom Night, just to name one, sucks, not because it's a remake per se, but because it's mortally flawed on too many levels. A bad movie is, well, just a bad movie.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Floydian Trip
PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 4:42 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 10 Aug 2008
Posts: 6478

Fresh, new ideas in horror are few and far between so I'll take the remakes in the off chance that you get a good one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mtrekster
PostPosted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:43 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 736
Location: bogs of Wv, sneaking among the critters and other things

greetings
_________________
Weve lost control: kill everyone (28 weeks later)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
All times are GMT

View next topic
View previous topic
Page 1 of 1
Dread Central Forum Index -> Night of the Living Newbie

Post new topic   Reply to topic


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum