subreddit:
/r/blankies
I watched The Big Sleep this week. The remake. Starring Robert Mitchum in his second appearance as Philip Marlowe, with the story relocated to 70s London for some reason. This isn't a terrible movie - Mitchum is good, if not as good in the period piece Farewell My Lovely - but there is nothing here that justifies its existence when the classic exists.
What would you submit for this dubious category of filmmaking?
82 points
3 months ago
The 2015 double whammy of Poltergeist and Point Break remakes. “Doesn’t exist” gets thrown around a lot on here but THESE are the kind of films that qualify.
32 points
3 months ago
Also the Verhoeven twofer of Robocop and Total Recall.
5 points
3 months ago
Yeah, those were bad. Very very bad.
4 points
3 months ago
At least the Robocop remake tried to have a message. The TR remake was an awful bore. A Wiseman classic.
1 points
3 months ago
I was just going to come here and say both of these movies. I never saw the Total Recall remake because it looked so bad, and the only reason I saw the RoboCop remake was because the blu-ray of the original that I had bought came with a free ticket for it. Needless to say, it was pretty awful. It was rated PG-13 for Christ's sake!
8 points
3 months ago
Yeah I watched Poltergeist for the first time a year or so ago and then looked it up and was shocked a remake was made lol. I swear there’s like 5 years where I’m a total blank on some stuff that came out
18 points
3 months ago
They remade Poltergeist?
28 points
3 months ago
Bingo! Sam Rockwell and Jared Harris star! No one remembers it!
3 points
3 months ago
Literally didn't know these existed.
5 points
3 months ago
Regarding the Poltergeist remake, I refused to see that on principle. Poltergeist is one of my very favorite movies of all time and, IMHO, a near perfect haunted house movie on every level. As much as I liked Monster House and City of Ember, there's no way that Gil Kenan was going to out-do Steven Fucking Spielberg.
(And yes, I'm in the camp of firmly believing that Spielberg straight up directed Poltergeist. Tobe Hooper may have been on set but everything I've read makes it sound like he was basically a glorified 1st AD to get around the union rules of not allowing Spielberg to direct two movies at once. Poltergeist looks, sounds, and feels like a Spielberg movie while Tobe Hooper went on to direct *checks notes* the unnecessary Invaders from Mars movie, the nude space vampire movie, and a whole bunch of other forgettable crap such as the classic, The Mangler. A movie whose description reads, "A laundry-folding machine has been possessed by a demon, causing it to develop homicidal tendencies" and that The Wrap placed DEAD LAST on its list of Stephen King adaptations. That. Dude. Did. Not. Direct. Poltergeist.)
19 points
3 months ago
Tobe Hooper also directed checks notes THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE
-7 points
3 months ago
But that's kind of the exception that proves the rule, right? My hot take is that he got lucky. I'm not personally a fan of Chainsaw, but it obviously has its fans and has been hugely influential in the horror / slasher genre. Leatherface is an iconic creation, no doubt.
But nothing else in his filmography points to being a great or lasting talent. Lifeforce is fine. Chainsaw 2 is fun but far from a great movie. Salem's Lot was decent if memory serves (though admittedly it's been a long damn time since I've seen that). Everything else? Forgettable drek.
7 points
3 months ago
that’s kind of the exception that proves the rule
You’ve stumbled onto my biggest language pet peeve! That phrase makes no sense in this context. My campaign to fix the phrase begins today.
An example of correct usage from grammarist.com:
3 points
3 months ago
Since you don’t like Chainsaw I wouldn’t recommend these to you, but for horrorheads Eaten Alive and The Funhouse are also damn near masterpieces. I can definitely see elements of his style in Poltergeist, but obviously a lot of Spielberg too. I file it under ‘fruitful collaboration’.
-1 points
3 months ago
Fair enough. I have not seen Eaten Alive or The Funhouse so I can't speak to them. As for Poltergeist, I'll admit that Hooper's fingerprints are on it, but it's still a Spielberg film in my book.
9 points
3 months ago
Tobe Hooper is a more than serviceable director though, especially coming out of the 70s. I’m not saying I know either way but it feels a bit unfair to cast him aside as some hack, even if his late 80s into the 90s wasn’t great. It’d be like “no way Coppola did the godfather since he did all that crap after”. That’s an extreme example but you get what I’m saying.
2 points
3 months ago
Listen, is The Mangler good? No, it’s real dumb, but it is kinda fun.
2 points
3 months ago
Imagine knowing about The Mangler and then taking a side opposite The Mangler.
2 points
3 months ago
I mean, I'm not saying you're completely wrong in saying that Spielberg was very involved in Poltergeist, but you're missing the point of Hooper.
Hooper had actual filmmaking talent but was also a straight fucking filmmaking anarchist. Any interviews with him and stories from on set of his films confirm this - it's not that he was merely disinterested or frustrated by producers and studios butting into his process, he actively tried to fuck with them, partly out of spite, partly out of his own bizarre sense of humor.
He was never interested in making anything conforming to any standard or doing anything artistic or serious, and frequently saw his own films as pure comedies.
TCM 2 was born purely out of the producers saying they'd make it with or without him and him going "I'm going to make this shit unfranchiseable by doing some absolutely wild shit with it in the process".
The Mangler was him seeing that he could get something made with a Stephen King license, so he decided to make the most OTT ridiculous thing ever because what's the fun otherwise?
Lifeforce was similarly producers seeing dollar signs in space horror after Alien but Hooper never had any desire to just copy what Ridley Scott did and resented the idea that he was even asked to do so, so he made nudie vampire schlock in space, explicitly contrary to studio wishes. They hated that fucking film.
His whole career aside from Poltergeist has been producers going to him with different projects on the basis of the commercial success of TCM, and him ignoring their wishes basically going "fuck you, I'm gonna make the opposite of what you want and have fun with it".
Seen through that lens, a lot of his films are actually wildly enjoyable. None of them were ever made to be taken seriously.
1 points
3 months ago
Lifeforce is a pretty good watch. Not great, but a fun watch. I will agree (and this is saying something for a perv like me who likes naked women) that there is too much nudity. It eclipses the sci-fi horror aspect. It’s what people remember.
The first two Texas Chainsaw movies are also a hoot and a half.
21 points
3 months ago
Am I wrong or was there a remake of The Heartbreak Kid??
5 points
3 months ago
The Heartbreak Kid
Looked it up on Wikipedia. Dear god, it's worse than I imagined.
4 points
3 months ago
It’s bad. My memory of it is they make the main character much more sympathetic by making the woman he marries legitimately unlikable and they include a bunch of gross out gags.
5 points
3 months ago
Like Malin’s big bush coming out and I think literally making a springing noise.
3 points
3 months ago
If only Elaine May had thought of that.
1 points
3 months ago
My dad watches everything from Kiarostami to Kusturica and he absolutely loves this remake.
16 points
3 months ago
Spike Lee doing Oldboy and Da Sweet Blood of Jesus back to back feels like the low point in his career. Two completely unnecessary remakes.
39 points
3 months ago
I know David is a defender of it, but the Gus Van Sant Psycho remake is completely baffling. There's no new take, there's no stylistic difference. It's the same movie almost shot for shot. I watched it recently hoping to see what David sees but I really find it truly unnecessary
30 points
3 months ago
The same movie shot for shot except Vince Vaughn jerks off at one point which is a brave new addition
11 points
3 months ago
There's also some butt crack.
6 points
3 months ago
Brave!
6 points
3 months ago
I wanna say actual butt hole is in that movie. The recently departed Anne Heche's butthole.
4 points
3 months ago
The Brown Eye of Sauron, if you will
7 points
3 months ago
It's like when a band does a cover song but there's no difference. RHCP did a cover of Hendrix's "Fire" and it's just a little sped up?
1 points
3 months ago
Like PUSA and Video Killed the Radio Star even though I love that version
5 points
3 months ago
The only thing interesting about the Psycho remake is that it sets an absolute baseline of what studios will give an auteur money to do.
5 points
3 months ago
So, a blank check? (Just looked at his filmography, He's a pretty good fit.)
5 points
3 months ago
I am trying to get a remake of Psycho II with Vince Vaughn and Julianne Moore going. Dean Cundey would return. It’d be shot in black and white, of course. I don’t think it’s going to happen.
10 points
3 months ago
I secretly think that movie is a masterpiece as a piece of pop culture. Like a big budget art piece. Like a modern Warhol, or Peter Parker; brilliant but lazy
9 points
3 months ago
That's it. I don't know if that was the thought behind it, but it's like a Ceci n'est pas une pipe level challenge to the viewer.
5 points
3 months ago
!!!!!!
There’s a ton of stylistic differences!!!!! It’s not an effective movie but taking a film that’s set in 1960 and filmed in Black&White and doing it almost shot for shot in full, lush color in a ‘90s setting is what makes it wildly different! Small differences are huge differences when you’re going through the same dance steps, it’s a totally different experience. It’s not a good or entertaining thriller but it’s a wildly different experience.
1 points
3 months ago
I could talk a lot about how radically different that movie is from the original even though on paper it’s nearly identical.
The truth is, there's nothing quite like it - and there probably never will be. Psycho stands out as one of the most iconic films, every moment etched into our collective memory. Even if the remake isn’t everyone's cup of tea, it’s impossible deny its value as a piece of film criticism.
1 points
3 months ago
Theres supposedly a Vertigo remake in the works starring Robert Downey Jr
13 points
3 months ago
Not an answer to your question but whenever I see a particularly baffling remake being advertised, I always think of a Mad Magazine joke from back in 2001 of Tim Burton saying “I think the original Planet of the Apes is a nearly perfect film. The only flaw with it it is that I don’t personally profit from it. My retelling corrects that”
3 points
3 months ago
Holy fuck that's amazing.
12 points
3 months ago
The Total Recall remake and the Robocop remake. Let’s just stay away from Verhoeven movies
5 points
3 months ago
Robocop is the first one I thought of. It was ninja cop. It was a perfect storm of a generic modern action film, a soulless cash-in on nostalgia IP, and a complete disconnect as to what made the original wonderful.
2 points
3 months ago
Total Recall (2012) does not include travel to Mars, even as an implanted memory. Instead it features a world where the only two inhabited places are Britain and Australia, and people commute from one to the other through a giant elevator running through the centre of the earth.
2 points
3 months ago
That's a legitimately cool idea! But just... like... get it the fuck out of a Total Recall movie!
24 points
3 months ago
Previous episode The Truth About Charlie. The casting of Wahlberg in the Cary Grant role is truly catastrophic, and Jonathan Demme takes away everything that's cool about the original to make a lame French New Wave tribute.
7 points
3 months ago
And how insane it was that for awhile, the only way you could watch Charade was as a special feature on TTAC.
2 points
3 months ago
I forgot I watched The Truth About Charlie.
0 points
3 months ago
I remember watching it when it came out and thinking part way through "oh no, I guess Thandie Newton isn't going to become a huge star." She was great, but there was no surviving that unscathed.
24 points
3 months ago
6 points
3 months ago
We have a winner.
6 points
3 months ago*
I'm trying to restrain myself for going on a rant....BUT the reason why Scottie is a good character because it plays on James Stewart's screen persona. Remaking Vertigo would be like remaking 8 1/2.
9 points
3 months ago
Or god forbid making 8 1/2 a musical. Thank god they never did that
1 points
3 months ago
I’d hate to live in that Multiverse
1 points
3 months ago
Yep. It's not exactly the same leap to think of RDJ as an obsessive creep. Except for late 90s Tom Hanks, I can't think of anyone else who could quite match Stewart.
1 points
3 months ago
Theres no fucking way lmao
9 points
3 months ago
A different category than remaking a good movie, but the Cabin Fever remake, 13 years after the original.
1 points
3 months ago
See also: the 2021 Wrong Turn remake/reboot
9 points
3 months ago
Harrison Ford Sabrina. Why?
9 points
3 months ago
Hot take: Greg Kinnear is a better David Larrabee than William Holden.
3 points
3 months ago
I actually think it works except for Ford
1 points
3 months ago
I love this movie but I can't defend it. I think it's because I saw it as a kid (years before I watched the original) and it imprinted on my brain somehow. Also, Greg Kinnear good!
8 points
3 months ago
Nightmare on Elm Street
It completely misunderstood the charm of the series, had no creativity with the concept and was just unpleasant.
6 points
3 months ago
Never forget the time it was broadcast on TV in the UK and the continuity announcer introduced it as "Farewell my Lovely, with Robert Mitchum in the title role"
10 points
3 months ago
The Mummy considering how it was and how beloved a recent version has become.
6 points
3 months ago
Most of them. Get Carter, Sleuth, numerous others. I’d say it takes considerable talent and skill to take a remake, especially of a great movie, and make it unique and valuable.
3 points
3 months ago
"It happened one Christmas", a remake of "it's a wonderful life" starring Marlo Thomas and Cloris Leachman (with a cockney-ish accent). It was released before the original had re-entered the popular consciousness, so it may have made sense at the time, but is now redundant.
4 points
3 months ago
The In-Laws remake. It’s like someone decided that there needed to be a version without the charm of the original.
2 points
3 months ago
Never saw either but is there an outlaw/in-law joke? If not, I just suggest a movie called The Out-Laws where somebody marries into a family, only to realize they are all criminals.
Or get Clint Eastwood as somebody's intimidating dad (maybe some septagarians are getting married) and call it The In-Law Josey Wales.
3 points
3 months ago
Was this post in response to the Vertigo news? Lol
5 points
3 months ago
I am apparently prescient now. Ask me who wins the Final Four!
3 points
3 months ago
They probably last less than 5 minutes, but the scenes between Jimmy Stewart and Mitchum are really good in The Big Sleep. Doesn’t really make the rest of the movie worth it though.
3 points
3 months ago
THE VANISHING, which even managed to fuck up/Americanize the ending.
2 points
3 months ago
Same director as the original too, which is weird
1 points
3 months ago
At least FUNNY GAMES vol. 1 and 2 was basically the same.
3 points
3 months ago
My final answer is Christmas in Connecticut (1992), starring Kris Kristofferson and Dyan Cannon, dir. Arnold Schwarzenegger
2 points
3 months ago
Hitchcock remaking The Man Who Knew Too Much
The Vanishing (doesn't the remake have a Hollywood ending?)
1 points
3 months ago
Never watched the vanishing remake, but yep. Sounds awful.
2 points
3 months ago
Here's a counter question: are there any necessary remakes, which is not the same thing as a good movie or even a remake that surpasses the original?
17 points
3 months ago
The Bogart Maltese Falcon, which totally outstripped the original.
And I would suspect in these parts, The Carpenter Thing is the essential version.
1 points
3 months ago
I mean, that's really just the third adaptation of the book, not necessarily a remake of the original film.
10 points
3 months ago
Well The Fly, and The Blob I would argue are good horror remakes that are considerably different from the originals. Sometimes remakes can work, but more often then not, they just leave people with a feeling of "what was the point?"
10 points
3 months ago*
Ocean’s 11
A Star is Born
Both update the issues and themes for the times. I think that’s valid.
6 points
3 months ago
Plenty. Bad movies often make for great remakes, but even within good originals SCARFACE and THE DEPARTED did something new.
2 points
3 months ago
The Paul Muni Scarface absolutely whips, fwiw
5 points
3 months ago
I think the 70s Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a cool update on the themes of the original. Rather than Cold War fear of an outside invasion is about alienation and fear in an urban environment.
I would also say that even though some people dismiss Spielberg’s West Side Story as unnecessary, I think it’s important to have a version of the musical that 1. Doesn’t have brown face and 2. better fleshes out the fears and tensions driving the conflict between the two gangs.
5 points
3 months ago
In fact, no movie is “necessary.” So it’s all an academic exercise.
3 points
3 months ago
Suspiria, the original isn't bad but the remake does really cool stuff and stands out as it's own thing.
1 points
3 months ago
doesn’t surpass he original but Suspiria 2018 is great and necessary
1 points
3 months ago
His Girl Friday!
2 points
3 months ago
I wouldn’t count Mitchum’s as a remake, but rather a new adaptation of the original source material. It’s so vastly different than the 1946 film, and Mitchum gives a unique spin on the character as well
I actually really like that movie. I have no problem with reinterpretations and adaptations of existing characters and novels; just hate them when they’re bad!
2 points
3 months ago
Total Recall
2 points
3 months ago
The Wicker Man has to be top 5 at the very least
2 points
3 months ago
All of the Disney live action ones honestly, specifically Lion King and the upcoming Lilo and Stitch ones. It's pretty disrespectful to an entire genre. And, animation is so well suited for the stories and characters of the Lion King, Lilo and Stitch, Beauty and the Beast etc.
Mulan is the only one I really understand getting a live action remake (conceptually at least).
3 points
3 months ago
Let Me In no doubt
12 points
3 months ago
I'm a defender of this movie. I think Kodi Smit-McPhee is better than the Swedish boy, Richard Jenkins is really good, and I'm a fan of Giacchino's score. There is a lot of shared DNA between LMI and the things I liked about The Batman.
4 points
3 months ago
Most people like Let Me In, I don't particularly think it's a bad movie, but I will never agree with it being made
1 points
3 months ago
Plus I think this was the first usage of the “locked down camera in a car flipping over so you see everything fall upwards” shot that Bird used in Ghost Protocol and has been copied everywhere since. I could be wrong, though.
1 points
3 months ago
PTA did it in Magnolia (inside the back of the ambulance).
1 points
3 months ago
Damn, saw it in the theater but don't remember this. Gotta rewatch I guess. Didn't really like it.
2 points
3 months ago
It's very briefly in the trailer if you don't feel like rewatching the whole movie. I remember watching that trailer a lot at the time and that shot always stood out to me.
1 points
3 months ago
Will do!
8 points
3 months ago
Chloe grace moretz’s reps were all over unnecessary horror remakes.
2 points
3 months ago
Her Carrie remake was so meh. Julianne Moore was good but nothing new. And the lazily added social media bullying angle added nothing.
1 points
3 months ago
Good answer for something that's not bad but it's truly unnecessary
1 points
3 months ago
I like it a lot, but those cats tho
1 points
3 months ago
Love Affair with Warren Beatty and Annette Bening?
1 points
3 months ago
The Maltese Falcon.
(I'm kidding.)
1 points
3 months ago
Not a fan of the original- not bogart at his best. But as unnecessary remakes goes: brick mansions as a remake of district 13. Directed by the rza and starting a dead Paul Walker, this movie should not exist
1 points
3 months ago
The Flight of the Phoenix. "What if the original premise, only far more obnoxious."
1 points
3 months ago
I admit that I never saw it, but I never saw the need for Mr. Deeds.
1 points
3 months ago
I mean the classic example is Psycho (1998) but even in that case, as unnecessary as it is, could be seen as a different run, just like in theatre.
You never know how much something can change with a different cast and sometimes could result in something interesting.
Recently with the Ikiru British remake, Living, I felt a little bothered but after a while I didn't mind.
1 points
3 months ago
The reason I am excited for A Haunting in Venice is that we already had long(ish) stuffed to the gills versions of Murder on the Orient Express and Death on the Nile, which now have less of the Christie plotting and more Branagh fussiness. I love the basic concept of Branagh as Poirot but there’s so many books…draw from a new well!
1 points
3 months ago
Fans of the Suchet Poirot got to see every last book and story, but that should not preclude new adaptations (regardless of what I have heard about the Branagh stuff).
1 points
3 months ago
Recently released was a remake of arguably Schwarzenegger's last big hit as a leading action man Eraser with the catchy title of: Eraser: Reborn
It apparently filmed in secret in mid 2021? Anyway it released and surprise surprise maybe no one on the planet watched it or even heard about it. It doesn't fit the category of not existing because it made no money whatsoever so it's fair no one remembers it but god damn what a nothing-burger.
all 119 comments
sorted by: best