40

10 Horror Remakes That Are Better Than You Might Think

Post Thumb:

/feb14/remakes.jpg

10 Horror Remakes That Are Better Than You Might ThinkTo preface this article, I’d like to openly acknowledge the fact that there isn’t a single “great” film on this list. Furthermore, given the concept of this piece, it’s safe to say that you’re not going to read about any significantly original films either.

The whole remake thing kind of blew those hopes out of the water. That said, we’re going to eye 10 remakes/reboots/reimaginings that were forced through the meat grinder upon arrival, despite the fact that they didn’t entirely deserve such brutish treatment.

Believe it or not, there are a few remakes out there worth watching. The horror world would have you believe that not a single film on this list qualifies, but I’m here – battling valiantly – to prove the voices of many wrong. Dig in for a closer look at some remakes that, while not monumental, still offer some redeeming qualities.

10 Horror Remakes That Are Better Than You Might Think

Black Christmas: Okay, let’s be real; Bob Clark’s original Black Christmas is about as close as you can get to a perfect film. From the palpable tension, the deep mystery and the haunting anonymity of said mystery and mysterious killer, you can’t ask for much more. But Glen Morgan’s 2006 reboot differed in just about every way imaginable. Gone are imaginative camera angles, severe claustrophobia and legit intrigue; in place is a direct forward tale that paints the killer in bright and obvious light. We know exactly what’s unfolding in this film, and while that extinguishes the unknown, it works – in positive fashion – on a completely different level. The aesthetic value (this film looks like Christmas like none other has ever accomplished) is priceless, and while tense sequences are a tad predictable, the gratuitous payoffs can be priceless.

My recommendation: Pretend the original doesn’t exist and prepare yourself for dumb, violent fun. Just don’t eat those flesh cookies!

Fright Night: Let’s get this out of the way immediately: The visual effects featured in Craig Gillespie’s Fright Night remake are terrible. Okay, they’re not terrible; they’re nauseatingly bad, embarrassingly stomach aching and downright despicable (I haven’t checked stats, but there may have actually been theatrical fatalities after being embarrassed to death by this shit). If there’s a film you can point at and say, “Now those are wretched special effects,” Fright Night is that movie. However, there’s a lot going on in this flick outside of the special effects alone.

Colin Farrell is particularly impressive as Jerry, the resident bloodsucker who’s taken to feeding on local Las Vegas call girls. Anton Yelchin – once you’ve accepted his rather extreme personality shift as Charley Brewster – works as a fine protagonist (thank the higher powers his conscience finally begins to tug at him). And the final showdown between the two, if you can get beyond the horrendous CGI sequences featuring both Charley and Jerry in the build-up (in regards to visual effects exclusively), it actually feels quite rewarding.

What it boils down to is this: Be willing to look beyond the visual effects and you’ll likely have a fine viewing experience.


MORE Not-Bad Horror Remakes on the NEXT page!



Halloween: Rob Zombie certainly didn’t nail a reimagining of John Carpenter’s Halloween in pitch-perfect fashion. There is an abundance of negative factors that come into play when studying this highly anticipated reboot. The pacing is horrendous, the casting is borderline embarrassing and the “Halloween” vibe earns serious neglect. That said, there aren’t many who could have made this one a certified masterpiece. John Carpenter did that quite well in 1978, and he may well be the only man capable of pulling off such a feat.

However, Rob’s attempt to bring Michael’s origin to the surface of things – something we hadn’t seen in previous installments – is noteworthy. Unlike countless filmmakers, Rob was driven to paint a more complex origin of the infamous Michael Myers, and whether you can support Rob’s first film as whole, it’s hard to deny the effort he put into the mythos of Michael Myers. The backstory makes for a completely new angle. It’s almost like watching a film from a completely different camera POV and catching a load of minor details you may have previously missed.

The casting could have been elevated quite a bit (sorry, Scout, but you fail), but at least we get a chance to see Brad Dourif in one of his greatest roles. This dude was born to play Sheriff Brackett.

Thir13en Ghosts: I won’t lie to you: The script for Steve Beck’s rendition of Thir13en Ghosts is a bit on the safe side. That said, it doesn’t really need to be overly intricate. William Castle’s original film is dreadful at best so virtually any director with a pulse could turn this one into a markedly improved product, even with a flat screenplay.

And that’s what we get from this reboot. The story isn’t spectacular, plot intricacies are nearly nonexistent, but what this flick has going for it is powerful visuals. The ghostly apparitions are quite jarring, and the breakneck pace of the film puts the original to complete shame. Hell, the introductory shot alone puts the original to shame. Is this remake amazing? No. But it’s a notably stronger effort than that offered by William Castle in 1960, and it’s profoundly more enjoyable than critics were eager to admit.


MORE Not-Bad Horror Remakes on the NEXT page!



House on Haunted Hill: House on Haunted Hill and Thir13en Ghosts play out as essentially carbon copies of one another. That’s not necessarily a terrible thing, but don’t anticipate any mind boggling differences between these flicks. Visually the edge likely goes to Thir13en Ghosts, but House on Haunted Hill has some creepy atmosphere going for it… and that damned super-fast blurry motion effect that – admittedly – blows my mind every time I see it.

There may be quite the abundance of plot holes to contend with here, and one of the strangest onscreen ensembles you’ll spot, but there’s brainless fun to be had. When compared directly to the original Vincent Price piece, the pic holds up pretty well. I love William Castle’s original, but let’s be real: The film is a little bit of a hackjob, despite its charm.

The Stepfather: It’s a little baffling how much disdain this remake drew. The ire was almost tangible, and truth be told, this Stepfather doesn’t really deserve that form of response. It’s not remotely near as chilling as Joseph Ruben’s flick, no doubt about it. Dylan Walsh is no Terry O’Quinn for that matter either. However, when Dylan snaps, it’s startling, and the man, no doubt, is frightening in his darkest moments. It’s a little flashy, I’ll openly admit. But any time this one hits the waves, I can’t help but to watch it.

You’ve got to admit, the “Who am I here?!” scene is exponentially better than it should have been. Those kinds of iconic shots seem damn near impossible to pull off, but in this case it actually worked out. That alone deserves really big points.

This is the type of motion picture that had no hope of rivaling the original source. It wasn’t going to happen. Terry O’Quinn delivered a once in a lifetime performance back in 1987, and kudos to him. That however isn’t a valid reason to crucify Walsh, who himself did a solid job as the face-changing killer in search of the perfect family.

The next time you’re thinking of dismissing this one, or refusing it a second chance, think for one moment and pretend the original film was never made. Now ask yourself: Could you have dug Nelson McCormick’s flick and the outrageous idea on display if an original feature had never been made? It’s still a cool enough idea that I’d be interested whether Joseph Ruben’s pic existed or not.


MORE Not-Bad Horror Remakes on the NEXT page!



A Nightmare on Elm Street: Here come a few picks that all but guarantee death threats via email. Sometimes a film is so insanely beloved that rebooting or reimagining it is considered two levels beyond taboo. A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of those movies. How dare Samuel Bayer and Platinum Dunes touch this oft-worshipped classic?! They just defecated on brilliance!

Well… not exactly.

There are some horrendous pacing issues in the film (a recurring theme on this list), and character focus is so blurred that we the viewer aren’t even certain of whom we’re supposed to be cheering for. Is it Kris? Is it Nancy? If not for Craven’s original, we’d never have a damn clue with how much emphasis is placed on Kris in the first act of the film. Okay, big, big errors there. Hell, there are problems with the cast as well. Rooney Mara is a despicable human being who phones in a flat performance, and Thomas Dekker couldn’t act his way out of a community college class. However – and this is where it gets tricky – Jackie Earle Haley is a pitch-perfect, astoundingly terrifying Freddy Krueger. Significantly more unsettling than Robert Englund, dare I say.

It’s messy, but between Haley’s depiction of Fred (the moment in which he advances on Dekker’s character and asks, “You think you can bring the dead back to life?” to which Dekker’s character quickly answers, “No,” before Krueger leans in even closer and says, “I didn’t fuckin’ think so!” is the single most frightening shot I’ve ever seen from the famed Krueger character), the amazing and shockingly realistic makeup work and Kyle Gallner’s all or nothing approach to the film, there’s something good to see here. Is it as good as Wes Craven’s original or Dream Warriors or even Wes Craven’s New Nightmare? Nah, but it’s damn chilling when it needs to be, and it’s clearly better than many would have you believe.

Friday the 13th: Oh no, he didn’t! Yes, he did. If you didn’t get a kick out of Marcus Nispel’s Friday the 13th reworking, you might not have a pulse. First off, the manner in which the writing crew successfully incorporated key elements of the first four Friday flicks was genius. It was new… and not new… simultaneously. Swing, and a hit. Next up, we get treated to one of the strongest ensembles any Friday film has ever boasted. Acting has never, ever taken priority in these films, but there are strong performers cast in this case, completely breaking the expected mold.

Jared Padalecki is a fine hero, Travis Van Winkle is extremely convincing as the Super Dick, Danielle Panabaker is a young Scream Queen worthy of supporting and Aaron Yoo delivers some honest to goodness funny punch-lines. And finally, the real kicker of this flick: quick, agile, wrecking ball, Jason. This hulking beast isn’t shambling through the shadows this time around. He’s more likely to clothesline your ass runnin’ 30 miles per hour. That alone could take a head off, who needs a machete?

Derek Mears brings a superb physicality to this one, and he alone travels a great distance in stealing the show. But he doesn’t, entirely, and he doesn’t carry the entertainment exclusively. He’s got help, and it’s a damn pleasure to see. Not since the first few Friday films has the Voorhees’ murderous family tradition been this thrilling, his victims so engaging.


MORE Not-Bad Horror Remakes on the NEXT page!



The Thing: Technically, The Thing wasn’t a remake. Except it kind of was a remake… of a remake. Redundancy was going to be a challenging obstacle to avoid as it is, given the fact that John Carpenter’s own remake painted the fate of the Norwegian base camp members pretty damn clear. It looked awfully obvious that the alien had been thawed/escaped and tore that camp apart from the inside out thanks to that nifty ability to absorb and shapeshift. You know, exactly what happens back at the American camp. So, right off the bat, it was probably reasonable to ward off any hope of a deeply thought-provoking concept.

With that said, the other big misfire comes in the excessive visual effects use. High caliber practical work isn’t easy, cheap or timely. It can actually be hell on set and delay schedules like you couldn’t imagine (look into the production of Jaws for a fine example of this form of hiccup). But computer graphics, while tedious in the task of creation, are something of a safer bet. The challenges that can occur when dealing with practical effects can typically be worked around and properly manipulated with the assistance of computers. But to remake The Thing (or make a prequel, if you prefer) with CGI-heavy SFX feels truly blasphemous.

The effects of the original were instrumental in the pic’s overall greatness. They are still to this day among the best effects you’ll find on film. You simply cannot cheat in that particular department if you’re out to create an amazing new chapter of a cherished story. In case you forgot, someone did some serious cheating.

But oddly enough, outside of those detriments, there are some real strengths to be unearthed. The script is much sharper than I initially believed after my inaugural viewing. There are some layers to the story that work, and the steady stream of tie-ins to Carpenter’s classic are greatly appreciated. A female is successfully infused into the story, and oddly enough (I have no idea if this was intentional or not) Ulrich Thomsen, who basically plays the “mad scientist,” looks a little bit like Robert Cornthwaite, who plays his mirror in The Thing from Another World, the first cinematic transfer of John W. Campbell, Jr.’s story, “Who Goes There?” It’s a really loose link that plays as strangely charming.

I certainly can’t claim the latest rendition of The Thing is a great movie. At all. But there are some killer sequences in the picture. I know because it’s one of those pics that no matter when it’s on, I find myself watching. That means something in my book.

House of Wax: Sometimes it’s best to just completely discard established groundwork, which is pretty much what director Jaume Collet-Serra opted for when putting together a House of Wax remake. The very first time this story was shot, it was loaded with comic relief and dumped on the masses under the title of Mystery of the Wax Museum. Fast forward 20 years and director André de Toth cast Vincent Price in the lead and eliminated a whole lot of the hokey jokes that hurt the first film.

Now, fast forward 52 more years, and not only has Collet-Serra kept the laughs away, we’ve also got what is basically a totally different story. In the Price version it all boils down to greed, jealousy, a flaming museum and a little cruel justice dealt to his seedy business partner. Warner Brothers’ 2005 flick has nothing to do with any of that… other than a building engulfed in flames.

This one travels the teen slasher route as a handful of kids find themselves stuck in what seems a ghost town. Well, it is a ghost town, as all the inhabitants have been turned into real life wax displays by a pair of lunatic brothers, and this group of traveling youngsters are next in line. Although radically different, this could easily be labeled the most entertaining House of Wax pic yet. Paris Hilton gets herself mutilated (always a plus), Jared Padalecki makes an appearance, the stunning Elisha Cuthbert flaunts her stuff and Chad Michael Murray proved he’s capable of shaking that awful “One Tree Hill” stigma.

So much better than pundits initially chirped!

VISIT THE EVILSHOP @ AMAZON!
Got news? Click here to submit it!
Remake yourself in the comments section below.
Image Type 1:

Matt Molgaard

40 Comments

  1. I’d agree with Fright Night, Thir13en Ghosts, Friday the 13th, and The Thing. Black Christmas I aaaaalmost like, but the third act and dumb incest subplot just ruins it for me. House of Wax is also kind of ok. Nothing I particularly want to revisit, but not the worst thing ever, either.

    However, I fucking HATE Halloween and A Nightmare on Elm Street. Halloween was two like watching a prequel that stopped short, explained nothing and just turned into a super rushed shot for shot retelling of the original at the last minute. As for Nightmare, it just KILLS me that it was such a wasted opportunity. With the advances in technology they could really have done some fun inventive things with the dream world sequences, but instead decided to just have every character get slashed in a boiler room. There was almost no thought or effort put in.

  2. Again, just want to say I appreciate the input. And, this is certainly no bait piece. The thing is, DC is a massive site – the traffic I bring in, in the rand scheme of things, is pretty much irrelevant. That said, I want to cover topics that force people to think and discuss. Obviously, this piece has got some people talking.

    I know for a fact that these films aren’t fantastic, but in my HONEST opinion, there are a few strengths in these films that a lot of people may not see, or choose to overlook due to the poor quality of the rest of the pics.

    Understandable stuff.

    But again, I’m not here to troll anyone, and truth is DC doesn’t need the traffic I’ll bring in – in the slightest. I write the stuff that I think people want to talk about. And if anyone has any other ideas for somewhat controversial topics, let me know – I’ve got the cods to speak my mind on anything.

    Again, thansk for reading everyone!!

  3. Matt here (cant get my login under my official name to work for some damn reason)

    First, this is no bait piece. These are genuine opinions. The idea of the article was to perhaps fuel viewers to give certain films a second chance.

    I have no other agenda. I’m just a genre freak trying o see the best in every flick we get. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

    Regardless, I appreciate your insight, even if you disagree with me. That’s the beauty of opinions – we’ve all got one, and none can be proven wrong, irrefutably.

    Keep reading guys!

  4. Newp, these are all fucking terrible movies any way you slice it. Even stuff like NOES is objectively bad from a filmmaking standpoint.

  5. Everyone here’s more or less stated my thoughts on this article. I’m still trying to figure out how exactly Rooney Mara is a ‘despicable human being’. That comment sounds like a personal attack, and kind of unprofessional.

  6. I just want to chime in and say that I’m familiar with Matt’s work from the Horror Novel Reviews website he not only runs, but authors insane numbers of articles for. His opinion may not match any of yours, but it is HIS opinion and I can tell you from having interacted with him many times that he would never create a bait and click article. The guy has integrity and he gives 100% with everything he does.

    I think this took guts, Matt. Good for you on being honest, man.

  7. No argument can be made for any movie on this click bait list. Especially NOES and The Thing which were lazy ass moronic retreads targeted toward people with a bias against any movie over ten years old. The Thing couldn’t decide if it was a remake or a prequel half the fucking time.

    “Technically, The Thing wasn’t a remake. Except it kind of was a remake… of a remake.”

    SO IT’S A REMAKE!

    “However – and this is where it gets tricky – Jackie Earle Haley is a pitch-perfect, astoundingly terrifying Freddy Krueger. Significantly more unsettling than Robert Englund, dare I say.”

    This comment was so meticulously crafted to arouse the anger of horror fans, it’s disgusting. Dread Central is SOOOO much better than this. Haley mumbled through his whole role, and the new Freddy looked like they slapped silly putty on his face and filmed it from there. The only reason why Haley got the role was because he killed it as Rorschach.

    I can think of a lot of remakes lambasted that should have been on the list. Hell, I could even agree to Dawn of the Dead 2004 being included on this list, and that movie has more holes than the ozone layer.

    I miss Dr. Gash.

    • This is NOT a click bait article. We don’t do that. When Matt came to me with this idea he knew full well he was gonna catch heat for it, but it’s something he wanted to do. These are his opinions. You can either agree or disagree, but his intentions are nothing but good.

      • If it was a click bait article it would be titled “Michelle Bachman’s Top 10 Horror Remakes That Are Better Than You Think”.

        Should I bother hitting save? Is it worth the trouble? Hmmm.

        Yeah, fuck it.

        • No that’s Buzzfeed Upworthy crap. Click bait comes in all forms, especially intentionally controversial stuff. Every bit of this article is tailored to annoy readers and inspire clicks. Every site does it.

      • Well, to be fair, “click bait” also refers to an article that makes you click through several pages to read the whole thing, essentially giving you 5 clicks (read: ad views) for one piece. So yes, it IS indeed click bait.

      • I’m by no means insinuating you’re a sell out or whatever arguments have been rallied in the past, but click baits don’t always have to be for revenue or to sell something. The article is clearly here to raise the hackles of readers, and it’s working well.

        • The funny thing which I’ve always found humorous in my ten years of doing this is that I could write 7000 stories a day that people will agree with and they’re lucky to get one comment if that. Something like this goes up and boom 3 pages of comments in less than 12 hours.

          It’s almost disheartening!

          • I wouldn’t fret too much, from my experience, people tend not to post comment unless they disagree with something. Only passionate people bother posting and anger/hate/disgust is a powerful passion! If you agree with something you are more likely to nod and smile and move on.

            Basically, if you get little comment you are probably doing something right, if you get ahuge outpouring of negativity at times you are as well – as that indicates you have a fanbase to begin with, they are just normally satisfied.

            In otherwords, rare outpourings of negativity are a good thing, they show you have both people who read the site and people who are passionate about the subject.

  8. But these movies would not exist without the originals, so what’s the purpose of an argument that says, hey, maybe people would have liked the forgettable Dylan Walsh Stepfather if it stood on its own?

    It doesn’t, so there’s absolutely no way of knowing.

    Nor do I buy for one second that any of these movies would have their own value if they were forged from originality.

    We’ll never know for sure, but just look at how people took to original Platinum Dunes productions like The Unborn and Horsemen. Those were trashed too, and no one’s sitting around making a case for them being “better than we think.”

    • The argument on whether these movies would be good on their own without original films is just a lame cop out to lend merit to these terrible movies. They’re awful with or without originals. Without the original Nightmare 2010 would be a lame revenge movie, Black Xmas would be a dumb vehicle for a bunch of young actresses, and The Stepfather would be a terrible pseudo thriller.

  9. I’m in the camp of folks who just don’t get the point of this list. The movies listed in here are not just bad when compared to the original, they are just bad period.

    I expected to see fun things like Piranha, My Bloody Valentine, or Toolbox Murders…

    • While I actually agree on the above listed being predominantly bad films, you mustn’t forget Piranha 3D WAS a success, and the two latter listed films actually received okay critical reception.
      An article reminding us of the films we already know are good won’t spark further conversation than a few comments that agree with it.
      What fun is that?

      Almost all of these films are lame and derivative. However – I hope I’m not alone in saying this – I actually enjoy seeing individuals trying to justify their admiration for shitty remakes/bad films in general – I find myself more captivated in reading those kinds of articles.
      I also find this function of stirring up discussions to be tons more fun (so long as people have good arguments and don’t simply contradict one another).

      That all said, I haven’t seen every single film on this list, but I know I love the Fright Night remake (for David Tennant alone) an unreasonable amount. And The Thing (2011), while a disrespectful cash grab “prequel”, did entertain me as a one time watch.

  10. Fright Night, Friday the 13th, House on Haunted Hill, Thir13en Ghosts and The Thing, I have to agree with. They’re all at least half-way decent. However, the Nightmare on Elm Street and Stepfather remakes are just plain awful, remakes or not. There are no redeeming value to either of those two. At least Halloween had – as stated – Brad Dourif.

    Anyway, another great article. Looking forward to more of these lists. I love ‘em…

  11. Wow. That’s a whack list. I know everybody has their own opinion, but shit. Be a little more fuckin selective. Sure, RZ’s Halloween had a few inspired moments, so did Fright Night, and I kinda liked the Thing prequel at times, really, this is a lot of nonsense. I know it’s not a list of good remakes, and it’s hard to find any that fall under the “not bad” category, but this list has no reason to exist, especially with this lineup. If this is the not bad list, I’d love to see the shitty remake list.

    • Why not do some digging and have overlooked remakes like Willard or Cat People or Toolbox Murders…(hell, even Psycho for it’s objective and experimental approach if you wanna be provocative). This just reads like a list of bad shit people recalled from the multiplex. I’m surprised The Fog and Sorority Row weren’t mentioned.

      • Im thinking you missed the point of the article. He wasn’t talking about decent remakes that were overlooked. He’s talking about remakes that were lambasted (and rightly so), and would they still have been as ill received as they were if the source material didn’t exist. It’s an interesting query, truth be told. That being said… The Stepfather is just shit, remake or not. Still… it’s an opinion piece.

      • Well… I shouldn’t have to. It’s not my job to write DC articles, and like I said, it’s a rather pointless list idea-celebrating the mediocre and the like. If you want to, go for it. Regardless, off the top of my head, The My Bloody Valentine remake was decent slasher fodder, and I’ll probably catch heat for saying this, but Cronenberg’s the Fly I would add as well. Sure, it’s better than your average remake, but even as a standalone film it’s vastly overrated, far too slow, and the creature f/x don’t impress me, and the gimmicky gross-out gags are lame when, besides Goldblum, its all the film has to offer. Maybe the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, if only for Lee Ermey. Maybe the Dawn of the Dead remake too….

        • Err, I think Kasch was just agreeing with you. Not suggesting that you yourself should have come up with that article.

          All that said – I personally enjoyed Thirteen Ghosts and House of Wax. Fun time-wasters, each.

      • I’d include Psycho, Dawn of the Dead, My Bloody Valentine 3D, Toolbox Murders, and the Invasion of the Body Snatchers remakes. Maybe even Night of the Living Dead 1990.

  12. I liked the latest version of The Thing, Friday the 13th and Fright Night.

    To compare them to others in their franchises than The Thing is the weakest of the films, Friday is average and Fright was the worst until that new sequel turned up.

    But the rest are still bad films regardless if they were original or not.

    And I saw the remakes of 13 Ghosts and Wax (or should that be Tourist Trap?) before I saw the originals (yep never saw Tourist Trap until last year).

  13. Congratulations for having giant balls Matt! I think that’s a Joe Biden quote. I like lists that get people agitated. I don’t think that’s trolling at all. Provoking maybe but there’s sound reasoning and room for thought and discussion.

    To be fair I haven’t seen a good half of the remakes on the list so I can’t comment. I do agree with the Thir13een Ghosts remake. I’ve always found it very enjoyable. I didn’t care at all for House of Wax, but then I always thought the original was incredibly overrated as well. And I just can’t get past the CGI in the Thing.

  14. I can understand the reasoning behind this list. Certain films I am able to enjoy without comparing to the original like the Black Christmas Remake and the House on Haunted Hill Remakes. Other remakes like Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th remakes I just cannot and I find them to be unwatchable rancid shit. Am Weird like that

  15. This felt like a troll article, one to gain page views and rile the masses. Has this contributor done other things? I’m not familiar with the mane.
    These movies suck for a reason, except House of Wax. I thought it was relatively well received as a fun, stupid movie.

    • Matt’s a relatively new contributor, but expect to see more. His focus has been doing these kinds of lists for us, like 15 Nauseating Horror Sequels and Top 10 Horror Fan Films, and also reviews now and then as he can. It’s what he likes to do, and we’re happy to have him on the team.

    • Actually from a “what if the originals never existed” standpoint, his reasoning is sound. Would they be judged so harshly? Who knows! He did mention in the beginning though that there was not a good movie on this list.

  16. My Top 3 from this list are House of Wax (very glad to see that included), House on Haunted Hill, and Thir13en Ghosts. Had a lot of fun with all of them. The others? Feh!

  17. I have complete hate & disdain for those horrid Halloween “Reimaginings” making Myers a hulking brute like a Jason was so laughably lame and totally blew the character not to mention the other numerous misfires. The Thing remake or prequel was a mixed bag the overused CGI killed it and i didn’t think the lead had anything on Macready from the Carpenter classic, i didn’t hate it though it definately had it’s moments.I also think the failed attempts at relaunching the F13 and Elm Street franchises are completly forgettable .Just my take classics should be left alone unless you can really do the original justice,is Hollywood just out of ideas?

Leave a Reply