Not another vampire movie!!!!!

[rimbaud]

good and bad is completely subjective. I know a LOT about film, and I am a major film buff. Most people say that I have pretty good taste in film. But to insinuate that an entire area of filmmaking is superior to another is close-minded. If you act so selectively you miss out on a lot of films that might have taken you by surprise. There are a lot of gems in comedy, teen romance, etc etc that you might be missing out on.

And on the concept of remakes, that seems rather silly to conclude that remakes are inherently bad. Every single one of Alfred Hitchcock's movies was either adapted from a play, a book, or an older movie. Adaptation is the life blood of good filmmaking.

In the 90's there was a remake of "Psycho". It was terrible, but the only reason it was terrible is that the filmmaker chose to emulate every one of Hitchcock's shots in the original film. The purpose of a remake is to expand on the original idea of a film, to add something new. A purely perfect film cannot be made again the same way, but if it is completely re-invented, there is still room for genius.

if you have not been reading, I'm not saying that there aren't any good comedies (meet the parents, the first one, the whole nine yards and the whole ten yards, naked gun, and many more...) or teen movies (10 things I hate about you, don't know if I can put Dead Poet's society, but still, you get my point)

As for the remakes, if these "geniuses" have something new to say, than make a good new movie. But ruining a perfectly awesome movie WRONG!

[DanielBenoit]

I haven't seen Let the Right One In yet, but want to very much. Can't say I'm to surprised to find out that Hollywood is remaking it. Sigh. They did that with Mostly Martha also.

Yeah it really is shameless. But. . .there are exceptions, that is, Scorsese's The Departed, which was a remake of the Hong Kong film Infernal Affairs. But Scorsese's picture is a work of art on its own and isn't some commercial Americanization of a foriegn film. I'm sure Scorsese would just as ready leave the original version the way it is if he didn't see something in which he can produce his own artistic merit in it.

As for the remakes, if these "geniuses" have something new to say, than make a good new movie. But ruining a perfectly awesome movie WRONG!

But the problem is rimbaud, is that all stories are in a sense "remakes", and it's been that way at least since the Greeks. Virgil's The Aenied (correct me if I'm wrong) was virtually a continuation of Homer's The Illiad, almost all of Shakespeare's work are "remakes" of older Greek tragedies and comedies, funnily enough, today almost all stories are based on Shakespeare now, in one form or another.

Don't forget either, that Tarantino's Resevoir Dogs was his own take on Kubrick's The Killing.

[Mathor]

Don't forget either, that Tarantino's Resevoir Dogs was his own take on Kubrick's The Killing.

Yeah, and Kill Bill was Tarantino trying to make a sort of modern day The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

[soundofmusic]

Yes, I am SoM, and I, am a vampire movie lover
Like alcoholism, a person never recovers from vampire love:

Dark Shadows: It was made when I was 10, it came out again when I had
a child that was 10, and it is now out on DVD.

Interview with a Vampire: Can anybody say they hated Tom Cruise (then
people... before he went on Oprah), Brad Pitt, Antonio Banderas,
and later, Aaliya...

Twilight: well, just look folks, there is something for everyone...and it was
written by a Mormon, you've got to love that...

[NickAdams]

Fact is, though, that blockbusters help the industry. As long as people are still going out and seeing movies in theaters, even if those movies are bad, it helps out the industry and allows for those companies to afford to take on the independent releases. The general public are always going to like crappy movies, this is never going to change.

You know, I just saw that the other night. I wonder what Bergman thought of his religous masterpiece being turned into a slasher film. I watched it, and I just couldn't find any way how this great and emotionally subtle film could inspire three remakes, all of them gory slasher pictures. I think they missed the point of Bergman's film, or they walked out on the last scene.

I can always find at least one virtue in a film that I generally dislike; the virtue is usually more useful to me as a filmmaker. What I liked about The Last House on the Left was that when the girls were taken into the woods they were so close to Mari's house. Leading up to the car malfunction, I thought the two girls were just victims for the movies opener (I knew nothing about the film going into it) and they were doomed - end of story. But, and I'm aware how completely contrived it is, them being so close to Mari's home had me on the edge of my seat with hope. Usually the victim in a film is trying to get to a phone, the sheriff (there are a lot of rural, or suburban horror films), a populated area (all of which is not guaranteed safety, because the villain is somehow connected), but parents give the sense of a definite shelter from harm, at least it does in this film.

good and bad is completely subjective. I know a LOT about film, and I am a major film buff. Most people say that I have pretty good taste in film. But to insinuate that an entire area of filmmaking is superior to another is close-minded. If you act so selectively you miss out on a lot of films that might have taken you by surprise. There are a lot of gems in comedy, teen romance, etc etc that you might be missing out on.

And on the concept of remakes, that seems rather silly to conclude that remakes are inherently bad. Every single one of Alfred Hitchcock's movies was either adapted from a play, a book, or an older movie. Adaptation is the life blood of good filmmaking.

In the 90's there was a remake of "Psycho". It was terrible, but the only reason it was terrible is that the filmmaker chose to emulate every one of Hitchcock's shots in the original film. The purpose of a remake is to expand on the original idea of a film, to add something new. A purely perfect film cannot be made again the same way, but if it is completely re-invented, there is still room for genius.

I guess there is more to like when the new film expands on the original instead of exploiting it. A lot of remakes loose the originals plausibility by either giving it a modern context or changing the setting, especially horror. I can believe Michael Myers may have been able to run around in the 70's, but not in this decade. Even the J-Horror remakes, or especially those. Japanese and American culture are very different and so is how the authorities operate. They change setting and characters, but never consider cultural differences.

Yeah it really is shameless. But. . .there are exceptions, that is, Scorsese's The Departed, which was a remake of the Hong Kong film Infernal Affairs. But Scorsese's picture is a work of art on its own and isn't some commercial Americanization of a foriegn film. I'm sure Scorsese would just as ready leave the original version the way it is if he didn't see something in which he can produce his own artistic merit in it.

When I said I found excessive use of camera pushes and rotations obnoxious, I was thinking of The Departed.

Yeah, and Kill Bill was Tarantino trying to make a sort of modern day The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Or Lady Snowblood.

[rimbaud]

Don't forget either, that Tarantino's Resevoir Dogs was his own take on Kubrick's The Killing.

Yeah, and Kill Bill was Tarantino trying to make a sort of modern day The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

I might have put it wrong, but I'm talking about BAD remakes, about those "geniuses".

not about the Departed or Reservoir dogs or whatever
I'm talking about the bad productions, bad remakes of an excellent movies.

Like Daniel said, the best remakes are the ones that go in a different direction than the original, so that it can then stand on its own as a film, as oppose to just some sort of mediocre imitation.

and not making remakes just because the original is old, black and white, or is in another language

[NickAdams]

and not making remakes just because the original is old, black and white, or is in another language

I agree. Woody Allen and Marty made black and white films in the 80's to protest against the colorization of black and white classics. Beyond subtitles, don't the still dub movies. I really don't see the need to remake a movie that came out last year, because it's not in english.

[DanielBenoit]

When I said I found excessive use of camera pushes and rotations obnoxious, I was thinking of The Departed.

Lol, that's funny. I can see what you're saying in the case of any other director, because rotations and pushes can easily get obnoxious. But in the case of Scorsese, I find the fact that in almost all of his films his camera is in a constant state of movement to be one of his best qualities, it adds a sense of depth and urgency to his characters.

[NickAdams]

Lol, that's funny. I can see what you're saying in the case of any other director, because rotations and pushes can easily get obnoxious. But in the case of Scorsese, I find the fact that in almost all of his films his camera is in a constant state of movement to be one of his best qualities, it adds a sense of depth and urgency to his characters.

It never bothered me in his other films ... you know what it is: the combo platter. There is a sequence in the departed where the edit goes from rotate to push, rotate to push. It might be because television directors have exploited his signature.

I don't think I truly got into a Scorsese film after The King of Comedy, which I think is very underrated. I like his work in the 90's, but I love his stuff from the 80's and 70's.

[DanielBenoit]

Just learned that the first film I'll be reviewing as a critic, the French thriller Tell No One is going to be remade, and is already in the pre-production process. Stop making Americanized remakes Hollywood! I'm sure American audiences can be open-minded enough to search out a foriegn film on their own if you'd just let them!

[rimbaud]

Just learned that the first film I'll be reviewing as a critic, the French thriller Tell No One is going to be remade, and is already in the pre-production process. Stop making Americanized remakes Hollywood! I'm sure American audiences can be open-minded enough to search out a foriegn film on their own if you'd just let them!

my point exactly!

[NickAdams]

I think I prefer remakes over the reboot trend that's happening in Hollywood.

my point exactly!

[manolia]

And more importantly: stop making Vampire movies! there is something as too much.

Not sure if this has been said before (too lazy to read all the posts ) but i strongly recommend this film

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1139797/

Watched it last night at the theater and i liked it very much
(ok it's not your typical vampire film..but still there's a vampire in it)

[Maximilianus]

Not sure if this has been said before (too lazy to read all the posts ) but i strongly recommend this film

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1139797/

Watched it last night at the theater and i liked it very much
(ok it's not your typical vampire film..but still there's a vampire in it)

I can't remember to have ever seen a Swedish movie, let alone about vampires. It must be surely different, I figure.

[DanielBenoit]

I can't remember to have ever seen a Swedish movie

Well that's something we are going to have to fix. I'm going to give you a name, just one name: Ingmar Bergman.

Through a Glass Darkly
Winter Light
The Seventh Seal
Wild Strawberries
Persona
Cries and Whispers

There you are, now GO to your local video rental store and SEE them.


Anyway, the King of all vampire movies is Nosferatu. Nobody has made a better vampire, not even Bela Lugosi, than Max Schreck.





Probably the greatest example of German Expressinism.