I saw THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO yesterday and loved it. I've heard that U.S. studios plan to remake it and cringe. God only knows what they'll choose to do with it. I was relieved that the BBC didn't buy it and install Swedes with British accent and colloquialisms as they did with the Wallender series. Also nice to see it on a big screen.
But back to the point, what's the worst remake of a film you ever saw. I vote for THE VANISHING. It was brilliant until US studios got hold of it. Is there a worse remake?
41 comments:
There are just so many out there, like THE IN-LAWS, a pointless remake of a classic.
I know it's television and not a movie, but how about the American version of FAWLTY TOWERS with Bea Arthur in the Basil role?
Doesn't get any worse than that.
Jeff M.
There's been so many: Psycho, Rollerball, Godzilla, Planet of the Apes, The Stepford Wives, etc. Hell, even the Oscar winning The Departed was a remake of the Hong Kong (and superior) film, Infernal Affairs.
Loved THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO as much as you did, Patti! I'm hoping the Sweds film the next two books in the MILLENNIUM trilogy, too! The remake of SHAFT was awful.
The Vanishing remake was awful. It took a haunting, gripping original movie and ruined it.
So many bad remakes. The Vanishing might be one of the worst, but as leopard13 mentions, there's also Psycho, Planet of the Apes. And you have the recent remake of "The Heartbreak Kid", which was a travesty, but I'm going with the Mel Brooks remake of 'To Be or Not to Be' as the absolute worse, since the original is my favorite movie ever, and all the comic genius and brilliant comic timing in the original is lost in the remake, even when they try to exactly duplicate the original scenes.
Let's hope they never remake "The Third Man", "Touch of Evil", "Casablanca".
And you know I've seen all of these just about. Part of the problem. THE HEARTBREAK kid-one of my favorite comedies of all times and the remake shows no notion on the writer and director's part of what made it great.
Infernal Affairs was better but that was a decent attempt at least. I have never understood the attraction of Mel Brooks. I just don't get the humor in any of his movies but I like verbal humor rather than slapstick, I guess.
The remake of the Stepford wives was the worst of all time, and perhaps near the worst movie ever made.
What irks me is remakes of British shows (I heard they're remaking Torchwood in the US). Why? We can understand English, right?
Seems like disappointment is inevitable.
Actually Davis Soul has already done Casablanca and it was every bit as bad as you'd imagine.
And on the Fawlty Towers front, you can add Whoopi Goldberg and John Laroquette efforts to the affront.
The three MILLENNIUM films were made all together, much in the manner of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, as I've noted on George's blog. (And, as I've noted, there was no really good reason to change Larsson's titles for the three novels nor the films in English, as they were not changed in any other language, much less to replicate the very sexism Larsson was mocking by calling all three THE GIRL WHO... when Salander is indeed a woman who is often condescended to thus.)
I'm surprised the assembled have managed not to mention THE HAUNTING remake, which managed to be even more a travesty, and by every intention, than was the PSYCHO remake the year before. It was also worse than the dire VANISHING remake. Similarly, the Wes Crave-branded "remake" of CARNIVAL OF SOULS. Something about turn of the '60s b&w horror/suspense seems to challenge asinine "auteurs" who hope to turn a colorful buck while masturbating (in PSYCHO's case literally) on the original.
SATAN MET A LADY, the second version of THE MALTESE FALCON, is pretty dire by me (though the first version, rettiled DANGEROUS FEMALE for television runs, was even worse. The Huston/Bogart version was the third).
THE MALTESE FALCON being, like BURN, WITCH, BURN!/THE NIGHT OF THE EAGLE (the second film version of Fritz Leiber's CONJURE WIFE--the first, WEIRD WOMAN, was bad), one of the rare remakes that significantly improve on the originals.
And Charles Bronson tried CASABLANCA, too, as CABOBLANCO, no worse than the Soul version.
(For that matter, MURDER, MY SWEET, the good Dick Powell version of FAREWELL, MY LOVELY, was technically a remake of THE FALCON TAKES OVER...)
and then there are the films that weren't that, if any, good to begin with which were remade even worse...LOST HORIZON...A STAR IS BORN...FUNNY GAMES...
It's important here, I think, for the original to be great and the remake godawful. That eliminates films like "The Stepford Wives" because even though the remake is in the running for worst movie ever made, the original was really nothing to get excited about. And even though it was a dud, Gus Van Sant's "Psycho" remake was at least an interesting experiment. I'm going with two films already mentioned: "The Haunting" and "The Vanishing".
I guess the question that begs answering here is why remake a movie?
The WAR OF THE WORLDS remake from a few years ago was pretty awful.
Why remake a movie you ask. I suppose because no one can come up with an original idea, most film versions of books are flops (mostly because the screenplay has little or nothing to do with the book) and someone figures, "hey, it worked once, why not try it again?"
I'd strongly disagree that PSYCHO was an interesting experiment...for one thing, it was based on the pretext that Joseph Stefano's adaptation of Robert Bloch's novel was somehow a primary text...and then claimed to be a shot for shot remake, which it was decidedly not. Arbogast's hallucinating Technicolor sheep as he falls down the stairs is pure Van Sant foolishness, nothing to do with Stefano, Bloch, Hitchcock or art, to cite a memorable example.
Arrogance, Patti. And the desire to make bucks. At least when the remake is bad. In the case of the good examples, to do the job correctly. And make bucks.
Quite literally, the asses Van Sant, de Bont and Craven all made noises about remaking PSYCHO, THE HAUNTING, and CARNIVAL OF SOULS because the originals were in black and white and The Kids Can't Dig That. As in, bullshit.
Racking my brain for a better choice than The Vanishing but I can't do it. You nailed it Patti. That was the most blatant "Americanization" of a truly amazing film. (I even named a cat Saskia once because we could never find her.)
I know most of what's been mentioned by reputation only. If I love a film and it gets remade, I avoid it at all costs. Even if I hear it's good.
My only other vote would be Point of No Return, the remake of La Femme Nikita.
Why THE HAUNTING wins for me, other than its utter inanity and waste of a good cast and opportunity: the sequence that has the two primary women characters skipping in and around a grotto in the house's library (improbable enough in itself--libraries always need large bodie of water in them, no?) that has stepping stones in the form of books. Get it, hah? ask the filmmakers...We're stomping on the book!
Good one, Eric. Another example of people not understanding the strengths of a film.
I don't think I ever saw THE HAUNTING. But I guess I will take your word, Todd, rather than put myself through it.
What about good remakes? Jack Finney's novel "The Body Snatchers" has been filmed four times without resulting in a single disaster. Don Siegel's 50s version is a classic. Philip Kaufman's 1978 remake is considered by many, including me, to be even better. Though little seen, Abel Ferrara's 1993 "Body Snatchers" isn't bad. Even Oliver Hirschbeigel's 2007 "The Invasion", trashed by critics and ignored by moviegoers, has its moments. Not many, but some. Has any other novel racked up two classic movies plus a pretty good one and one that was at least OK?
How about the remake of the John Ford 1937 classic THE HURRICANE with Brooke Shields. Blech-h-hhh.
David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club, Benjamin Button) is going to direct the US remake of Girl With the Dragon Tatoo.
As of right now anyway. It has changed twice already, I believe.
Breathless
Damn, so many bad ones, aren't there?
I detested Benjamin Buttons-so that's bad news although maybe he's better at gritty movies.
Oh, Breathless. Does any Richard Gere movie hold up?
Patti Richard Gere's Days of Heaven is a great film.
The Japanese Shall We Dance was made into the terrible U.S. version starring-Richard Gere.
I actually prefer Scorcese's The Departed over the Hong Kong original which while good was overtly too sentimental at times.
Days of Heaven was very good--maybe he didn't know he was Richard Gere yet. Oh, that was a real travesty. Loved the Japanese version-so subtle downplayed.
and how could I forget The Day the Earth Stood Still. Original, great movie, the remake, a muddled mess. Then you've got "The Last Man on Earth" with Vincent Price, good movie, closest adaptation to Legend. 'The Omega Man', lousy movie, Legend with Will Smith was technically well-made but made you almost want to cry it was such a hollywood distortion.
I liked Gere's Breathless much more than the original, which bored me silly.
THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO remake. Good gawd, will they ever learn!
My pick would be the PSYCHO. There was no purpose.
MP: Four decent versions, at least-- DRACULA, FRANKENSTEIN, SENSE AND SENSIBILITY, THE ADVENTURES OF TOM SAWYER (more than four, but I'd reckon four decent ones...of course, true of the first two as well)...
Bill Crider had a note that we'd soon have a remake of OVERBOARD, the Goldie Hawn situation tragedy that was basically a ripoff or adaptation of SWEPT AWAY..., the original a horrible, overpraised bit of spite, which will mean essentially four lousy versions of that (including Madonna Ciccone's vanity remake of SWEPT...).
Come to think of it, CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY (at least it restored the proper title, though not the proper focus).
Hated OVERBOARD (and SWEPT AWAY) but she never did make a good movie-and I include PRIVATE BENJAMIN. Another actor (actress) way too conscious of themselves.
I AM LEGEND almost made me weep in frustration. Why did they have to make the changes they made?
Who wants to weigh in on LOLITA? Almost right up there with VANISHED is the Cohn Bros. THE LADYKILLERS.
Oh, hell yes, THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL should never have been attempted. And Jan de Bont's directorial career just about ended with that poor excuse of a film THE HAUNTING turned out to be, IMO. If I can keep adding to this thread, let's mention MEET JOE BLACK as another travesty for its attempt at a remake for the 1934 classic, DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY.
MP, sorry but don't agree. The second BODY SNATCHERS was OK but not better than the original and I hated the third.
Yes, BREATHLESS was abysmal.
Can't believe no one mentioned one movie that pretty much fits all criteria: Madonna in SWEPT AWAY.
Bummer, I see Todd beat me to this one.
Jeff M.
I didn't mind the seventies Body Snatchers. Then again, I haven't seen it since then. Maybe it doesn't hold up.
I found it kinda goofy (Baird Searles, reviewing it for F&SF, was reminded of MONTY PYTHON), but that's not necessarily a flaw (though he hated the injoke of having Kevin McCarthy pounding cars again in a cameo). I've watched only pieces of the two newer ones. None of the remakes has the urgency of the first film, from what I've seen. Inasmuch as the scene in which Sutherland's health inspector is challenging a restauranteur to eat the "crouton" he's found sticks in the memory more than any other aspect of that version, I'd say it's not quite the success that was hoped for.
The 1990 remake of THE DESPERATE HOURS has to be seen to be believed. Literally everything from the original was dumbed down beyond recognition and Mickey Rourke still holds the world record for over-acting, I think.
As for great remakes: HIS GIRL FRIDAY (orig. as THE FRONT PAGE in 1931). The 1974 THE FRONT PAGE was also quite good. Then there's a fourth version, titled SWITCHING CHANNELS, which I have not seen.
Also, John Carpenter's THE THING is way better than the original.
And am I the only one who thinks the remake of THE STEPFORD WIVES wasn't so bad?
Oddly enough, the remake of THE STEPFORD WIVES was playing on cable last night when I got home, but it wasn't engaging enough to stick with (being on AMC meant it was riddled with commercials and probably edits, as well). I've never seen very much of it.
HIS GIRL FRIDAY might be one of the best remakes so far, certainly among the top five I've seen. SWITCHING CHANNELS I remember as being pleasant enough, but I'm partial to Kathleen Turner (wondering if I can swing seeing her one-woman show as Molly Ivins in its local run).
No one has even taken aim at the barrelled fish that are the KING KONG remakes, albeit except for the quasi-sequel KING KONG ESCAPES or the travesty QUEEN KONG, none seem to sink to truly historic badness.
With you re "The Vanishing". Caught the UK prem at the London Film Festival. The director did a Q&A afterwards and spent the duration talking about the original.He looked and sounded embarrassed. With good reason.
Changing the ending was just so typical of remakes. The ending is what sealed the deal with the original.
The Wiz
THE WIZ is right up there.
I'll agree with THE WIZ as one of the worst movie remakes. However, THE WIZ stage play was an extraordinary and great re-telling of that children's novel. If the studio that did the film version had stayed with the original Tony Award story-line of the play (and used Stephanie Mills instead of ol' Diana Ross) I don't think we'd be adding the film to this category. Plus, if I wanted to do a film drama (whether New York-based or not), few would do it better than director Sidney Lumet. But, he would NOT have my choice for a film adaptation of an award winning, popular musical stage play, IMO.
Post a Comment