Remakes why bother?

Hi everyone and welcome back.

There is currently talk about a new movie that looks to be have given the green light, it is a remake of the 1960 classic western "The Magnificent Seven" which in itself is a remake of the superb Japanese film "Seven Samurai" released in 1954. This news got me thinking about movie remakes and should they happen and if so how many years should they wait before attempting to give them a fresh look? or in fact should they not remake a film and leave the original alone? These are interesting questions as in the last few years there have been various remakes that have not been anywhere as good as the originals.

I would say that as with "The Magnificent Seven" 50 years is a long enough period to have elapsed as most of the younger generation of movie goers wouldn't remember the originals, there were a further 3 films made in the franchise including "Return of the Seven" "Guns of the Magnificent Seven" and lastly in 1972 "The Magnificent Seven Ride"  So if the new remade film is handled correctly then I don't foresee any problems and I believe it could work as there are too few westerns being produced. The original was a remake of a Japanese film which even now seems to be a popular trend in Hollywood of copying Asian films, especially in the horror and action genre the likes of "The Ring" "Oldboy" "The Grudge" and many more. There is even talk of an American version of the best action movie of not only 2011 but for many a year "The Raid" which was directed by Welshmen Gareth Evans and made in Indonesia, if so please let him be the director.

To remake a film or even try to reboot a popular franchise after only ten years on from the original is too soon and the biggest example of this is the 2012 reboot of Spider-Man. "The Amazing Spider-Man" starring Andrew Garfield and directed by Marc Webb was released exactly 10 years after Sam Raimi had made his version "Spider-Man" starring Tobey Maguire as the webslinger. I loved the original trilogy and would have liked Sam Raimi to have continued with his vision of my childhood hero but it wasn't to be. Now we have the new version of the same story told in a slightly different way but how many times can an origin story be told?  Also, the new films didn't grab me in the way the originals did, I don't know if it's the actors, the story or the overkill of effects, there is just something that doesn't seem right. In the latest movie "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" the action sequences felt very much like a computer game. Also, Garfield doesn't do it for me as Peter Parker.

There are plenty of examples of terrible remakes, too many for this blog, but I have chosen a few of my pet hates, lets see if you agree.

Let's start with the criminally awful 2001 "Planet of the Apes" directed by Tim Burton and starring Mark Wahlberg. This film was not a patch on the original 1968 classic starring the late great Charlton Heston, and in it they even changed the ending, which was so iconic in the original when Taylor, played by Heston, finds the ruins of the Statue of Liberty on the beach therefore realizing that he had in fact been on the future earth throughout the whole film and which must have been a shock for all the audiences at the time, but in the remake Wahlbergs' character escapes in a spaceship back to earth, which was now controlled by apes and crash lands at the feet of the statue of Abraham Lincoln in Washington, only to see that it was in fact replaced with the statue of the ape Thade, who was the character played by Tim Roth. Unlike the original which was a pure sci-fi classic hit the remake was a bumbling mess which is best not remembered. Thank heavens for the new reboot of the last few years "Rise" and "Dawn" of the "Planet of the Apes" which instead of trying to remake the original have in fact brought back to life the franchise with a new fresh take on the origins of the story and of course brilliant skills from Andy Serkis and his motion capture performances.

The next on my list is a remake of the 1987 "RoboCop" starring Peter Weller and directed by Paul Verhoeven. It has been well documented that this film was a nightmare to make with many production problems along with disputes between director, writers, actors and the demand of the production company, but in the end they made a movie that is one of the best of that decade. Peter Wellers' portrayal of police officer Murphy both as a human and robot is pure genius. Fast forward to 2014 and the remake of the same name but nowhere near the same quality. Directed by Jose Padilha and starring a relatively unknown actor Joel Kinnaman as RoboCop. This attempt at bringing the franchise back to life failed so badly that no amount of surgery could ever resurrect it no matter how hard they try. The appeal of the original was that the main character Murphy was brought back to life only being able to function as half man, half robot and with no chance of being reunited with his wife and son, this was an emotional part of the story mixed in with terrific action pieces. But in the remake they changed the story so that Murphy was back with his his family who accepted him without question although he was basically 99% robot. This change in the story totally took away the feeling of emotion that the original had created. I believe that the producers and director just didn't get what the original was about maybe they had never even watched it!

The last example of remake hell is "Total Recall" originally made in 1990 and remade in 2012. The original director and star were Paul Verhoeven and Arnold Schwarzenegger respectively, the remake was directed by Len Wiseman and starred Colin Farrell, need I say more?

There are many other examples of when remakes have failed "Robin Hood" 2010, "Alfie" 2004, "Get Carter" 2000,"The Karate Kid" 2010, "A Nightmare on Elm Street" 2010, "The Omen" 2006 and many, many more. It's a shame as a movie fan that it's easier to recall the bad apples as opposed to the good, but this is the reality. The only worthwhile remake that's fresh in my mind is 2012's "Dredd" which was a vast improvement on the dire 1995 "Judge Dredd" starring Sylvester Stallone.

So if the movie heads are considering a remake at least wait long enough until the time is right. Give the public enough time to let the originals pass through their consciousness or at least until they can find the right director who will show respect to the original and actors who can pull off the same quality if not better performances than the original actors. I'm not against remakes I just believe that most classic films are a hard act to follow, so why try? For example there is only one Indiana Jones, Harrison Ford, so don't bother. Create a new updated "Raiders" with a different character so the new actor is not competing with Ford, or don't go near it.

Aside from remakes there are now reboots which attempt to resurrect a past franchise, these are done with the sole purpose of keeping the original movies alive and fresh in peoples minds and also to rake in money from the box office on the back of their popularity. Because of the growing interest from the fans of them they seem to be welcomed and the anticipation for the new films is very high, the biggest examples of these are the upcoming "Star Wars", "Star Trek" and one of the films that I mentioned before the "Planet of the Apes" series. These reboots are at least attempting to come up with fresh story lines and are generally successful as they are not infringing on the originals and are being handled in a way that won't upset movie fans like me, as they are respecting the originals.

Until next week don't watch the remakes enjoy the originals you won't regret it I promise.

Miles Dunton.