Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 26 Oct 2002 00:10:58 -0400 |
In-Reply-To: |
<p05100306b9df4986e293@[192.168.10.3]> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>Can anyone think of a remake that was more successful (artistically
>or financially) that its original?
I think plenty have been financially more successful ranging from remakes
where the original is practically unknown (Meet the Parents) or was
withheld from wider distribution (Gaslight, Gigi) to simply being a higher
profile release (Red Dragon) or the having benefit of inflation (The
Haunting). And then there are things like the new Insomnia (grossing $67
million by the end of Sept) which certainly beats the original's BO but
that's hardly a level playing field.
Red Dragon brings up the issue of when films are actually remakes as
opposed to a new version of a source novel. For instance, The Maltese
Falcon is often referred to as a remake better than the original (or two
earlier films in that case) but it clearly owes little if anything to the
earlier films and shouldn't be considered a remake.
Remakes that are more sucessful artistically? My suggestions would be The
Man Who Knew Too Much (56), Reservoir Dogs (if that counts), The Fly
(Cronenberg), Imitation of Life (Sirk), China-Gate (Bollywood remake of
Seven Samurai but then I've never liked Kurosawa), Invasion of the Body
Snatchers (not better but as good), & there must be others.
LT
-----------------------------
"It's people like us who took a mass medium and
made it what it is today--a subculture."
Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons
The Funhouse Journal
http://wlt4.home.mindspring.com/blog/journal.htm
----
For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html
|
|
|