RE-MAKES... HERESY or HOMAGE ???

[Haylar Garcia]

I have been approached about a property that was a fairly large, though not very well made film in the 80's.
I have done a little research about it on the net and the recent talks of a remake has got people split right down the middle. Many people seem to hate the idea that Hollywood is constantly remaking films, the general chatter is "Why can;t they come up with original ideas". I for one am often one of those people. The problem is, remakes seem to make a hell of a lot of cash despite the opinions that they are cheap in some artistic way.

Any opinions? What do I do... go for the paycheck? Walk away out of honor for the original film?

This is not Citizen Cane we are talking about, the original film is a classic are most originals are hailed, but it is by no means an amazing film... The original source material is amazing, so is it cheap to consider that the remake could actually be better?

I would love opinions on this.

-Haylar 08

[Scott Swaggart]

Haylar, by all means do it. What great experience it will be. You aren't going to be corrupting your talent by doing this, you will be rising the standard. Right? And getting a fat paycheck. If it is great, people will remember it; if it doesn't work it will disappear; either way you will have gained income and experience. What's the question?

Scott S.

[Haylar Garcia]

Thanks Scott, Yeah I have accepted.

-H

[Kathryn Gould]

I think it is rare that a remake is a better film, but I don't think it's impossible. Often in an updated version it will turn out to be a more relevant film for our time period. I thoroughly enjoyed the remake of 3:10 to Yuma, and had recently seen the original, which I also enjoyed. They were very different films, but the recent one was definitely a modern take, not as cheerful and heroic as the original. I guess my answer is, it depends on the film and it depends on what you do with it.

[Haylar Garcia]

very much agreed.

[Harold Faletti]

There are some films that should never be remade, like Psycho. Directors like Hitchcock and John Houston put so much of their personality into their films that a remake is likely to fail unless the original can be distilled to its essence and then reconstituted into something completely new. But there are films that have a good story but maybe were wrong for their times or not well executed. Haylar, if you get a chance to rewrite a good story that isn't an iconic film, I would say go for it and try to put all yourself into it and remake it for our time. If you can develop a reputation as a script doctor, like Robert Towne who wrote Chinatown, that would be fantastic. And --

Great foreign films sometimes say something different in English, or Italian -- I was thinking of a Fist Full of Dollars. Or changing the genre might reveal something different. Like remaking a western as a futuristic sci-fi drama. But if they want you to rewrite John Hughes, well -- that might work. Most are based on the oldest formula -- boy meets girl.

Or, you could remake Othello as a Venusian who becomes president of the United States. Married to an earthling. Sorry for going on. Too much election hysteria.

[Nelson Goforth]

Take the money and run.

While I, too, lament that H'wood can't seem to make more original movies, it is still a business.

On the 'split down the middle': Was this 80's movie original, or did it have antecedents, a novel or a comic? There's a lot of fanboys out there who'll hate you no matter what you do. "But his eyes were hazel!", etc.

Shakespeare would be castigated (if not sued down to his Elizabethan skivvies) today since he 'stole' almost every plot he used. What he did do was do it better. If this 80's movies was poorly done, take this as an opportunity to take a good property (I'm assuming) and do it better. Remakes only bug me when they aren't done better than the original, and if the only difference is that it's in color it just doesn't count.