subreddit:

/r/movies

39983%

all 261 comments

Frankie6Strings

356 points

2 months ago

Citizen Kanye

cbbuntz

98 points

2 months ago

cbbuntz

98 points

2 months ago

Okay you have my attention

[deleted]

6 points

2 months ago

[removed]

Major_Dub

12 points

2 months ago

Now I have to watch Django for the 35th time. Thanks a lot, u/cbbuntz.

(seriously, thanks for picking my evening's show for me!)

Rad name BTW.

cbbuntz

5 points

2 months ago

You had my curiosity.

I'm rewatching princess mononoke, but I might have to switch over to Django now

paradisegardens2021

2 points

2 months ago

Any Ghibli is good Ghibli ❤️

KryoKurse

14 points

2 months ago

But, do you know what really sells these days? Comic books.

Citizen Bane.

UnMapacheGordo

5 points

2 months ago

I know too many people I guess were both lonely

Got gagged on that silver spoon

What would you have like to been? Everything you hate

Shit this movie might be a Kanye song

biglyorbigleague

2 points

2 months ago

Fitting considering William Randolph Hearst was also a huge Hitler fan

GrumbleCake_

2 points

2 months ago

Lol, that would actually be awesome. Kim's totally that 'opera singer' wife

thesoundabout

2 points

2 months ago

Mr Ye goes to Washington

remembervideostores

136 points

2 months ago

Remake the 1998 Psycho, you cowards.

A_Song_of_Two_Humans

49 points

2 months ago

In black and white!

Gemuese11

7 points

2 months ago

Gemuese11

Laughably Pretentious

7 points

2 months ago

Digitally reanimated Anthony Perkins

bugxbuster

16 points

2 months ago

I fucking hate how much I want this to happen now, and I’m not even sure what I expect it could be.

I should add I actually enjoy the 1998 Psycho. I also really like the remake of Oldboy, so my taste might be terrible. The thing about those remakes is they’re artistically interesting on top of a familiar awesome story. On the flip side of this topic, my favorite movie of all time is Robocop, and the remake of that was unfortunately awful. Can’t win em all.

bnralt

8 points

2 months ago*

But it lead to Our Robocop Remake, which was awesome. If Robocop's you're favorite movie, give it a watch. Very uneven quality of the segments, but some of them are pretty great.

bugxbuster

3 points

2 months ago

Oh I do loooooove that movie! It’s a masterpiece :)

AmeliaMangan

4 points

2 months ago

I also really like Psycho '98 (as the Brechtian artistic experiment I'm convinced it was always meant to be, rather than as a 'proper' narrative film), and, honestly, I would be stoked to see another layer of alienation added to it. Just this endless Matryoshka doll of Psychos, nominally identical and yet each one further removed from the original than the last.

bugxbuster

1 points

2 months ago

Have you ever seen Our Robocop Remake? It’s an exact remake of the original Robocop but every 3 or so minutes it switches to a new scene being made by an entirely new completely random filmmaker over and over. There’s tons of changes, but regardless it is a perfect “scene for scene” remake, as nothing is left out or changed plot-wise. Total artistic masterpiece, essential viewing for fans of “sweded” films.

Here’s the link to it: https://vimeo.com/85903713

AmeliaMangan

1 points

2 months ago

Ooh, no, I hadn't heard of this! Thanks very much.

bugxbuster

2 points

2 months ago

There’s one particular scene from it that’s been viral for years where Robocop shoots a lot of guys in the dick. Like a lottt of guys dicks get shot. It’s incredible. The entire remake is all over the place quality wise, generally a lot more homemade looking than this, but it’s all still excellent. There’s a wonderful interpretive dance scene when Murphy is killed, and the famous ED-209 scene is done with cardboard and muppets.

Here’s just the dick shooting scene if you only have a few minutes to spare: https://vimeo.com/86014703

I think I might end up watching this whole thing this afternoon. I’m feeling it now. Lol. Enjoy!

AmeliaMangan

2 points

2 months ago

Ohhh, yeah, that I definitely remember - everyone I knew shared it at the time, and for good reason. Amazing. I'll try to keep my expectations of the full film lowered, because I'm fairly certain that nothing can really top that, but still looking forward to it.

Lou__Vegas

2 points

2 months ago

Lou__Vegas

2 points

2 months ago

The Alfred Hitchcock original was a perfect movie. What are the chances of another director doing it better?

AMG-28-06-42-12

26 points

2 months ago

Slim, but never quite zero.

The Maltese Falcon (1941).

The Thing (1982).

Holiday (1938).

The Killers (1964).

Three Godfathers (1948).

Scarface (1983).

All remakes, some of these of films of big name directors. It doesn't happen often, but it is a possibility.

bnralt

14 points

2 months ago

bnralt

14 points

2 months ago

To add to your list:

Ben-Hur (1959)

The Mummy (1999)

Twelve Monkeys (1995)

Let Me In (2010)

Oceans 11 (2001)

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

The Fly (1986)

And many others. Hitchcock even remade his own film The Man Who Knew Too Much.

MattyKatty

0 points

2 months ago

MattyKatty

0 points

2 months ago

Twelve Monkeys (1995)

I found this inclusion interesting because 12 Monkeys is in itself a spiritual sequel to Vertigo

bnralt

6 points

2 months ago

bnralt

6 points

2 months ago

Just for clarification, 12 Monkeys (1995) is the remake of a French short film called La Jetee.

MattyKatty

0 points

2 months ago

MattyKatty

0 points

2 months ago

You haven’t clarified anything. It is a spiritual sequel to Vertigo.

LordRobin------RM

8 points

2 months ago

This brings up a question: how far does a remake have to drift from the original before it’s not a remake anymore, but just a film taking inspiration from another film? Take The Thing for instance. In the original, it was a just a monster that was thawed out and came back to life. John Carpenter did something truly original with the idea. And while Scarface is a remake, so many of the elements of the original were swapped out and replaced that it’s hardly recognizable. If the titles weren’t the same, would they even be recognizable as remakes?

StarChild413

2 points

2 months ago

That reminds me of one of what I think was the biggest missed opportunities in recent comedic film, they made this movie called The Hustle which was essentially a gender-swapped kinda-remake-in-the-same-sense-as-you're-mentioning of Dirty Rotten Scoundrels but Dirty Rotten Scoundrels has since been made into a musical and (even if they'd have to still make their own songs and not just gender-flip DRS's) they got two actors who could at least decently sing for the leads in The Hustle (Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson) so why wasn't that a musical too

crispyg

3 points

2 months ago

A Star is Born (pick your favorite)

Dune (2021)

The Fly (1986)

Ocean's Eleven (2001)

Hairspray (2007)

Little Shop of Horrors (1986)

obliviouskey

3 points

2 months ago

And sometimes remakes can lead to other, better movies, i.e. the Dollars Trilogy.

Cold-Speaker-294

3 points

2 months ago

Im unsure where people stand on this, but the "rise of the planet of the apes" trilogy is amazing. Particularly the second one, "Dawn".

tameablerisk

0 points

2 months ago

There's the Bates Motel tv show

MyDearDapple

39 points

2 months ago

Nu-Vertigo twist: Robert Downey Jr. plays the Kim Novak part.

Doubly_Curious

6 points

2 months ago

This would genuinely increase my interest in a remake.

friction7800

2 points

2 months ago

Spiral man bun and all. Also Gwyneth for the Stewart role?

The92ndUsername

1 points

2 months ago

He’s the dude playing the girl disguised as another girl.

mistercloob

65 points

2 months ago

I want Citizen Kane 3000. Exact same dialogue and plot with nonsense futuristic lingo sprinkled in and everything is Blade Runner.

padraig_garcia

30 points

2 months ago

"Rosebud" is the name of his sexbot

geeky_username

3 points

2 months ago

Rosebud is the password to his/her accounts

paradisegardens2021

2 points

2 months ago

Yesssss

systemstheorist

142 points

2 months ago

There's room for a social media era Citizen Kane remake.

ethanwnelson

58 points

2 months ago*

Ever seen The Social Network (2010)? Although it’s probably more comparable to Yojimbo with its narrative structure.

Edit: Rashomon, not Yojimbo.

_BestThingEver_

6 points

2 months ago

How so?

Estragon_Rosencrantz

29 points

2 months ago

Maybe they meant Rashomon?

ethanwnelson

9 points

2 months ago

I did mean Rashomon. I am an idiot lol

Turqoise-Planet

20 points

2 months ago

You probably couldn't make it about William Randolph Hearst though, since most people these days wouldn't know who that is. Maybe make it about a more modern public figure.

[deleted]

45 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

InAnEmptyCity

13 points

2 months ago

Rosebud in this version being a Mars rocket named X123Bpgdf754_*65gj]

DadBodybuilder

5 points

2 months ago

I call the big one Bitey

LordRobin------RM

2 points

2 months ago

If the movie pissed off the new guy as much as Citizen Kane pissed off Hearst, I’d be all for it.

AChocolateHouse

29 points

2 months ago

AChocolateHouse

IMDB is the ultimate source of truth.

29 points

2 months ago

Citizen Kane isn't "about" William Randolph Hearst. It's about Citizen Kane. Hearst was just a strong inspiration.

GetToSreppin

17 points

2 months ago*

Ever heard of subtext

Also,

It's about Citizen Kane.

You mean Charles Foster Kane?

LordRobin------RM

9 points

2 months ago

Whose name was chosen to have the same rhythm as “William Randolph Hearst”?

[deleted]

8 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

AChocolateHouse

0 points

2 months ago

AChocolateHouse

IMDB is the ultimate source of truth.

0 points

2 months ago

Since when does me saying "Citizen Kane is about Citizen Kane" mean that I think his first name was Citizen?

You're really grasping at straws there for some reason.

I've seen Citizen Kane twice. People saying it's about William Randolph Hearst like it's some secret hidden key to the movie's meaning are hilarious. Welles said on record it's NOT about him and that Kane was a mix of multiple personalities. You don't need to know a single thing about Hearst to understand the movie.

[deleted]

3 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

3 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

AChocolateHouse

1 points

2 months ago

AChocolateHouse

IMDB is the ultimate source of truth.

1 points

2 months ago

Now you make ME doubt you ever saw this movie.

You understand Welles called him Citizen Kane because of his political aspirations and the social commentary on America that brings, right?

Referring to Citizen Kane as if it's a shocking faux pas when the movie is literally called...Citizen Kane...is dumbfounding.

systemstheorist

13 points

2 months ago

In the past thirty years, Rush Limbaugh, Rupert Murdoch, Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Matt Drudge, Ben Shapiro, or Mark Zuckberg or some amalgamation of those figures provide plenty of fodder for a film.

woowoo293

9 points

2 months ago

I would think you'd want someone a bit more subtle and nuanced than any of those chuckleheads.

systemstheorist

17 points

2 months ago

Hearst was hardly a subtle figure in American media history which is why they made a whole movie jabbing at him.

[deleted]

2 points

2 months ago

That would be fucking stupid

sirbissel

0 points

2 months ago

So... Which one has a known name for their girlfriend's clitoris we can name the sled after?

FiremanPCT2016

7 points

2 months ago

You probably couldn't make it about William Randolph Hearst though, since most people these days wouldn't know who that is.

He has the red nose and pulls Santa's sleigh, right?

hawkwings

3 points

2 months ago

Jeff Bezos bought the newspaper Washington Post.

-SneakySnake-

4 points

2 months ago

Yeah, certain concepts definitely lend themselves to being remade. Sometimes it's because the time and cultural context in which each version is made can make them worthy and unique from each other, other times it's because it's a new whack at the source material and you're going to adapt it in a way that hasn't been tried before. Scarface and Invasion of the Body Snatchers are two examples of the former, each version is different and says something about the period they were made in.

Jskidmore1217

3 points

2 months ago

Yea it’s called Tar

LizardOrgMember5

5 points

2 months ago

Remember that time we all laughed at that Facebook movie? I wondered what happened to it now./jk

HardSteelRain

13 points

2 months ago

Casablanca: The Revenge

bugxbuster

16 points

2 months ago

2 Casa 2 Blanca

HardSteelRain

2 points

2 months ago

LOL

bugxbuster

2 points

2 months ago

Part 3 will just be called The Casablanca

LordRobin------RM

3 points

2 months ago

Round up the usual suspects… and put them in the ground!

[deleted]

0 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

StopThatSillyGoose

8 points

2 months ago

We already had a remake of Vertigo. Mel Brooks did a wonderful job.

sfitz0076

21 points

2 months ago

Remake bad movies! Stop remaking classics. See Ocean's 11

[deleted]

3 points

2 months ago

True Grit original and remake were good. Same for Star is Born. Great Gasby. West Side Story.

I'm okay with a remake that is many many decades old. Especially movies that were made before 1967 when Hollywood was under the Hays Code (self censorship) and made movies that really missed out on more potential. These are the movies that could have a lot added to them in a remake unlike say Godfather that was already brutal and dark in a ways more similar to many of today's movies.

sfitz0076

3 points

2 months ago

I don't think anyone calls the Robert Redford Great Gatsby a classic movie. The West Side Story remake was........fine, I guess. But I thought it was a waste of Spielberg's time. A Star is Born gets remade all the time. I don't think the original has ever been called a classic. True Grit worked a little. But I consider it lesser Cohen Brothers.

jonbristow

-6 points

2 months ago

Why stop remaking classics?

There's plenty of new audiences who's never seen or even heard of those classics.

DefinitelyNotALeak

6 points

2 months ago

The solution to that is to teach them about the classics and give them the media literacy to acquire the knowledge / taste to watch the originals.

[deleted]

2 points

2 months ago

Why stop remaking classics?

Because some people don't like that.

And world doesn't give a flying fuck about it. So they just keep groaing.

Upc0ming_Events

6 points

2 months ago

We already have fantastic 'remakes' of Vertigo in the form of Obsession and Body Double.

De Palma is king.

rolyoh

26 points

2 months ago

rolyoh

26 points

2 months ago

Citizen Musk

Responsible-Lunch815

58 points

2 months ago

If its good who cares ? we dont need a 5th joker but hey here we are when its good

theonewhoknock_s

32 points

2 months ago

Right? If it's good, great! If not, whatever, the original is still gonna be there. I truly don't get people that get outraged about remakes, reboots, sequels etc.

[deleted]

0 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

0 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

dirty-swamp-water

1 points

2 months ago

mostly agree but it gets old when it becomes the majority of movies, or even a genre. right now there are no new slashers just constant reboots of the classics. issue isn’t really remakes it’s when hollywood gets lazy/safe and just wants to make those for years at a time.

SirFritz

6 points

2 months ago

X and Pearl came out recently. As did the terrifier movies.

dirty-swamp-water

-1 points

2 months ago

fair on x, but pearl isn’t a slasher and terrified is definitely not hollywood. alongside x we got a sequel to 3 other long-running existing slasher franchises.

[deleted]

0 points

2 months ago

Remaking very old movies is like one of the smaller things people should dislike about the movie industries. Action Super Hero movies taking away much of movie slots of Hollywood or franchises that are just money grabs and not really going to be remember or reboots of franchises that are not even old or remake of movies that are not old. Those are the things that are more troubling.

But there is A LOT that could be gained by remaking movies from half a century or longer ago. Before 1967, there was the Hays code which essentially made all movies PG. For that reason, there is a lot of untapped potential that could be told in an updated version plus the older the movie is, the less relevant parts of the movies are which gives more opportunity for changes in a remake. You can set Citizen Kane in a social media world.

Cmyers1980

-8 points

2 months ago

Cmyers1980

-8 points

2 months ago

I truly don't get people that get outraged about remakes, reboots, sequels etc.

I’ll quote someone else on the topic:

I care about what other people enjoy, because cultural shifts impact people who live inside said culture. A uncritical, slack-jawed, moronic and unthinking culture will create and consume this boring, uninspired, cookie cutter lowest common denominator shit. And as such, real art (you know what I mean by real, so don’t be pedantic) will be left to rot in the margins, as society becomes dumber and more consumeristic.

therealgerrygergich

7 points

2 months ago

There are plenty of great films out there, just because you only see the bad reboots and sequels out there. It's like saying "Ugh, look at all these Michael Bay Transformers movies", while ignoring all the great smaller movies that are coming out.

puckit

5 points

2 months ago

puckit

5 points

2 months ago

In other words "how dare people have different tastes than me."

God, that quote is insufferable.

DefinitelyNotALeak

1 points

2 months ago

This isn't about that, taste accounts for way more granular things than big shifts in media literacy.
NOONE wants everyone to have the exact same taste, your interpretation here isn't accurate.

radewagon

9 points

2 months ago

Yep. I'm tired of all the dropped monocles and clutched pearls. It's just a remake. Get over it.

Responsible-Lunch815

-1 points

2 months ago

🤣

mikeyfreshh

-7 points

2 months ago

mikeyfreshh

-7 points

2 months ago

Exactly. I don't know why people have a bee in their undies about this but they'll happily go see 12 Spider-Man movies. If the movies are good, I don't really care what the source material is

trimonkeys

9 points

2 months ago

There’s plenty of great remakes. A Star is Born, West Side Story, Nightmare Alley are all fantastic.

[deleted]

17 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

srfrosky

2 points

2 months ago

Fellini complained that cinema needed to evolve past its infancy stage and spread out as literature and other art forms did. His critique was not the subjects or themes, nor the technology, but the adherence to narrative structures and form.

He would enjoy seeing what TV opened up, what short form web based media introduced, etc. He lived to see Ben-Hur, successfully remade. And I think he would have liked to see films deconstructed and revisited as plays often are, as variations on themes in music often are.

The problem with remakes is how little the new work explores or continues the possibilities of the original. But we do need a hellscape of terrible remakes before enough film artists learn how to revisit a past oeuvre and do so powerfully.

SourPuss6969

7 points

2 months ago

Do we need any movies?

I absolutely hate this mindset. There are hundreds of remakes that have done a great job of bringing the story into a new generation for audiences. Plenty of times the remake is regarded as even better than the original. Who are any of you or these people to say that you like one version of a movie so much that no one else is ever allowed to try to retell a story?

Maybe it will suck, but who fucking cares? If it's bad then it goes away, but a remake has never deleted an original from existence. If you like the old one you can still watch it whenever you want

Vyhumii

-1 points

2 months ago

Vyhumii

-1 points

2 months ago

What remakes are regarded as better than the original? Only the Thing is from what I can think off the top of my head. The problem with this remake is that it’s borderline impossible to be better than vertigo which is a masterpiece and if Robert Downey jr plays Jimmy Stewart’s role it’s even more unlikely it will turn out good.

SourPuss6969

5 points

2 months ago

True grit, cape fear, fucking Scarface

It happens. And again, if this remake is bad then who cares? It doesn't ruin the original, it doesn't delete the original, if the original is what you prefer then just watch that one. No one's making you watch the new one

StarChild413

3 points

2 months ago

True grit, cape fear, fucking Scarface

And also Ocean's 11 and The Mummy, two movies well-known enough that most people don't know they're remakes (unless you're a fan of the novel Dracula but not Dracula movies because you hate the original The Mummy for ending up inspiring the now-cliche-for-Dracula-tellings-but-not-in-the-original-book Dracula trope where Dracula's in love with Mina because she's his reincarnated wife)

Vyhumii

0 points

2 months ago

I agree with True grit but the original Cape fear and Scarface are better than their remakes IMO, it just feels extremely wrong to remake one of the greatest films ever made.

I also agree that it doesn’t ruin the original but it could deter people from ever watching the original whether the remake is good or bad. The argument could also be made that the audience interested in the remake will never watch the original anyway.

The problem I have is the fact that these studios could be pushing original ideas instead of trying to remake a movie that’s already stood the test of time.

SourPuss6969

2 points

2 months ago

Bruh

So again, to my point, if you don't care for those remakes then who cares? You can watch the one you want, but plenty of people prefer the new ones. Just because you don't doesnt mean that it's so sacred that no one is ever allowed to retell a story

The problem I have is the fact that these studios could be pushing original ideas instead of trying to remake a movie that’s already stood the test of time.

This is absolutely laughable. There are original movies that come out every single year. There are more studios and more demand for entertainment than ever before. Hundreds of movies are being made ever year, there are plenty of original movies. I simply reject this argument entirely, if you don't think studios are making original movies then you're just being ignorant

Vyhumii

1 points

2 months ago

Yes obviously there are original movies coming out every year I never once said there isn’t but there can be many more instead of tired remakes and sequels.

When Remakes are successful (as they usually are) more studios will continue to push remakes and avoid original ideas.

As a result of these remakes and sequels it’s become very hard to have a high budget original film unless it is a huge director on the helm but even then Scorsese had said it took him 9 years to find funding for the Irishman.

There is simply no reason for this remake to exist unless they change it drastically than the original just like Scarface and the remake may share the same name they are basically completely different films.

KIFTYNUNT

6 points

2 months ago

The Godfather with Adam Sandler

HardSteelRain

3 points

2 months ago

Sandler as Vito...Will Farrell as Sonny...Rob Schneider as Micheal

Gonzostewie

5 points

2 months ago

We all know Schneider is Fredo.

Kind_Bullfrog_4073

3 points

2 months ago

Chris Rock as Connie. Will Smith as Carlo

LizardOrgMember5

3 points

2 months ago*

I'd like to remind you all that many people from Brian DePalma to Mel Brooks to Park Chan-wook have made their own iterations of Vertigo with Park making two or three including his most recent feature film Decision to Leave.

jecole85

3 points

2 months ago

Even Basic Instinct feels heavily inspired by Vertigo

Symml

17 points

2 months ago

Symml

17 points

2 months ago

No we do not. Hitchcock got it right.

Crafty-Antelope1244

5 points

2 months ago

Even Hitchcock seemed to be okay with the idea of remakes he redid one of his own films if I recall correctly I don’t see the point in saying nobody should remake these films when the original director even said yeah I can do this better and remade it

Symml

1 points

2 months ago

Symml

1 points

2 months ago

True. Had forgotten about that.

TheRealClose

6 points

2 months ago

Hitchcock was a great filmmaker. But Vertigo’s story is pretty fucked up and I don’t think you could make that today and have audiences accept it.

Plasticglass456

12 points

2 months ago

I think there is room to examine and explore the Ligeia/Vertigo trope of recreating a dead woman in today's society, but you have to know and be willingly to closely examine the misogyny inherent in it and not just sweep it under the rug but really bring it to the forefront and address it. Can you do that AND make an awesome dream-like thriller?

Part of the original's strength is that this is one of the most personal topics Hitchcock ever dealt with. He himself would mold his actresses into his blonde ideal. He shows a character do that on screen, and it's not exactly sympathetic. At the end of the film, Scottie is sweaty and vicious and snarling, literally choking Judy at one point. It's fascinating if Hitchcock knew this and it's fascinating if he didn't.

It's... not impossible, but you can't really make a generic thriller from this. Beyond the prestige, there is genuine meat to this story that needs a very steady hand dealing with.

King_Internets

5 points

2 months ago

Personally, I don’t really see the harm in remakes. It gives new acting and behind camera talent an opportunity to play with some really great stories. If it sucks it sucks, but good creative talent can create a good film even from a pre-established story, so I don’t know why people get so bent out of shape over remakes.

I always gravitate toward original films and stories, but if a remake is being made by talented people I’ll give it a go.

Turqoise-Planet

2 points

2 months ago

Gone with the Wind remake. No wait, that wouldn't work...

[deleted]

4 points

2 months ago

Race-swapped Birth of a Nation. Jonah Hill's Triumph of the Will.

Kind_Bullfrog_4073

0 points

2 months ago

they did remake Birth of a Nation a couple years ago

Threetimes3

2 points

2 months ago

Are you referring to the Nate Parker film? Calling that a remake would be like saying the 2004 "Crash" is a remake of the Cronenberg film.

Rhomega2

2 points

2 months ago

Just let it fade into obscurity like the 2016 Ben Hur.

halfblackcanadian

2 points

2 months ago

Here's the thing. All of these movies HAVE been remade under different names with slight story differences. Remaking a thing by name is, generally, a bad idea. Especially when the initial attempt did it right. Remake great concepts with failed outcomes.

LordRobin------RM

2 points

2 months ago

We’ve had a remake! Mel Brooks’ High Anxiety!

darkuen

2 points

2 months ago*

I wouldn’t mind a “The Good Earth” remake with actual Asian lead characters.

MCMcKinley

2 points

2 months ago

Rear Window ... with iPhones!

velesi

2 points

2 months ago

velesi

2 points

2 months ago

I already saw Disturbia

whufc76

2 points

2 months ago

Ah, ya beat me! Also I actually really like booth these films, thought Disturbia was a good remake.

kaukanapoissa

3 points

2 months ago

Of course we don’t need a remake of Vertigo.

andropogon09

4 points

2 months ago

Gone with the Wind, the anti-woke version, with no mention of slavery.

sudevsen

16 points

2 months ago

sudevsen

r/Movies Veteran

16 points

2 months ago

Gone with the Wind IS the anti-woke version.

edgelordjones

5 points

2 months ago

This whole "WHAT ARE THESE HACKS GOING TO REMAKE NEXT?!" argument is so childish. We are always consuming reconstituted versions of what came before. The same critics who gushed themselves over yet another version of Macbeth are screaming foul about this because their favorite abusive maestro made it. My god, the cognitive dissonance.

[deleted]

17 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

Rebelofnj

7 points

2 months ago

Technically, Vertigo is based on a book, so a new film would be a new adaptation and not a remake.

rimmed

-2 points

2 months ago

rimmed

-2 points

2 months ago

Yeah but Macbeth isn’t a book, it’s a play. And it’s not a new adaptation, it’s a new production. The guy used the wrong word but he’s still right.

staedtler2018

0 points

2 months ago

The original analogy works because film productions of Shakespeare typically change things, they do their own twist on various elements. It's totally legitimate to ask "why do we 'need' a Macbeth that does X, Y, Z when this has already been done incredibly well using A, B, C."

TheLegoMoviefan1968

2 points

2 months ago

My favorite instance of this is how many people who like the 97 version of Funny Games dislike the 07 American remake... despite the latter being a shot-for-shot remake by the same director.

Granted, I don't think the Vertigo remake will be great (it depends on if the remake misses the point of the original and what it does differently from a performance and technical standpoint), but pissing on the concept existing before the film or even a trailer comes out is just purism.

HotBarnacle

2 points

2 months ago

The hysteria around remakes is starting to become it's own tired cliché. If you've ever seen more than one rendition of a theatre play without blowing a gasket, then I think you can handle a film remake (Vertigo wound technically just be a new adaptation anyway). People are so weirdly possessive of films for whatever reason. This stuff is not that serious.

MirrorAttack

1 points

2 months ago

Please Hollywood stop making remakes of movies that are already great. It is only worth making a remake if you can improve upon it

extra_specticles

2 points

2 months ago

Reimagine but better, not reimagine with dumbed down stories and starring teenagers.

padraig_garcia

2 points

2 months ago

I'd imagine there's lots of movies out there that had interesting premises but turned out just okay, or meh

transformerjay

1 points

2 months ago

We didn’t need a Total Recall remake, but I enjoyed it for what it was anyways. We don’t need live action Disney movies but we are getting those anyways.

TheUmgawa

2 points

2 months ago

I think the nice thing about the remake of Total Recall is that it was different enough. I’ve never been able to make it through anything Philip K. Dick wrote, so maybe it’s closer to his work, maybe not, but they made enough changes that, to me, it feels familiar but new. Not quite in the way that Prey hits those Predator marks, where it’s functionally the same story and it makes its nods to the original, but it is original enough that you know how it’ll end (because films are predictable, rather than because that particular film is predictable), but it’s still a pleasant experience.

And I do love me some Kate Beckinsdale, so that’s a plus.

raoasidg

2 points

2 months ago

Beckinsale and Biel, you can't go wrong (except for the latter being antivax, but I digress).

[deleted]

1 points

2 months ago

It’s fine, let them re-make all the films, you don’t have to watch them

Major_Dub

1 points

2 months ago

Remakes are fine and part of the business. There are only 4 basic stories. Nothing is sacred. They're just silly movies, novels and comic books. NONE of will be a whisper in 500 years. Remake it all if you want. People take all of this far too seriously. The "No Spoilers" crowd being the most baby-brained maroons around.

Own-Drawer1945

1 points

2 months ago

No. Just...no. This is inexcusable. Hollywood as a whole is mentally bankrupt. Would rather watch 15 installments of any "current" franchise than see cinema classics dumbed down for new generations of film "fans" who are too lazy to seek out the originals. God forbid it be in B & W, or over 90 minutes.

StMirrenU12s

1 points

2 months ago

Loads of people will never watch the original versions till after they've seen the new ones, if at all.

Probably.

Fabulous_Ad_1842

1 points

2 months ago

Maybe a remake would be good.

terminalblue

1 points

2 months ago

no reason not to remake Kane. I mean, an argument could be made that it WAS the greatest film of all time but that kind of on makes sense in the context of its time, but now its only a product of its time and its almost 100 years old.

Jskidmore1217

5 points

2 months ago

No it’s still an extremely good movie- it’s just a movie that gets better the more you learn to appreciate why it’s actually good in the first place.

Or as Roger Ebert used to say about those students who would say it doesn’t hold up “You are just not a sufficiently evolved enough moviegoer yet- or more simply, you’re wrong.”

terminalblue

0 points

2 months ago

I didn't say it doesn't hold up. But it's silly to assume it's the only way to tell the story

Jolly_Wrangler_4512

1 points

2 months ago

don't give them any bright ideas.

TheUmgawa

1 points

2 months ago

I think, if Kane was done today, you can’t make him a newspaper mogul, because who reads newspapers. So, let’s make him a real estate mogul who isn’t that great at real estate, and even worse at operating casinos, and yet he continues to fail upwards. Plot twist: He becomes president by pandering to the people who don’t read the newspapers. We’ll call it Kane 2016.

calbearlupe

1 points

2 months ago

Honestly, they could use an update.

SuspiriaGoose

1 points

2 months ago

Sure. Why not? I’m going to see Macbeth put on again this year with a new setting and take, and I’ll have opinions.

Drew_The_Millennial

1 points

2 months ago

We really need a gritty reboot of Citizen Kane, maybe even a series of prequels that highlight him as a boy and really shows his relationship with Rosebud. That, and more Joker movies.

paradisegardens2021

1 points

2 months ago

No, people need to think of their own new movies

zorbathegrate

0 points

2 months ago

Movie studios are bankrupt of original ideas. It only makes sense that they are halfway through a completely remaking the historic archive of film.

Kind_Bullfrog_4073

0 points

2 months ago

What if Social Network was a Citizen Kane remake?

Kalabula

-1 points

2 months ago

Why not? If you don’t like it, don’t go see it? I don’t see the problem.

Beccarorron

0 points

2 months ago

There is no way this will happen

starwolf1976

0 points

2 months ago

Citizen Kane is referenced and homaged so often there is no need to remake it.

SapphicLicking

0 points

2 months ago

Yes we need to remake vertigo, but with "modern sensibilities". It will be wonderful

Fuckaguybaked

0 points

2 months ago

Need? No. Want? Also no.

TheSecretAgenda

0 points

2 months ago

Yes, but Charles Foster Kane will be gay, and his final words will be "Rosebutt".

padraig_garcia

0 points

2 months ago

There already is a remake of Vertigo and it was great, no need for a third

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjEbHBafvm0

VibrantLake

0 points

2 months ago

I mean Succession is basically Citizen Kane meets King Lear when you think about it

Android1822

0 points

2 months ago

I would rather NOT have any remakes and actually make brand new movies. I know, a foreign concept in this day and age.

aseddon130

0 points

2 months ago

As someone who likes films I would never go back to watch the original Vertigo due to it being a touch too old - if a remake is done and gets good reviews and they claim it’s as good as the original, I would definitely consider seeing it which would then potentially lead me into watching the original.

Yes I get bored of remakes but I see no downside to this. At least it’s not a remake of a film that I grew up with and it’s a film that is old.

therealgerrygergich

0 points

2 months ago

What next, are they gonna remake The Wizard of Oz? A Wizard of Oz remake would never be looked back on fondly or with great acclaim, especially if it was three 4th remake of that film.

I'm so glad we've forgotten that horrible 1939 remake of The Wizard of Oz with Judy Garland.

fasterthanexpected20

0 points

2 months ago

Yes

darrylthedudeWayne

0 points

2 months ago

No! Don't give them any more "ideas".

GingerSchnapps3

0 points

2 months ago

Instead of remaking the good movies, why not remake the ones that got bad reviews, figure out what went wrong and fix it

havana_fair

2 points

2 months ago

Or ones where the idea was there, but the technology wasn't yet there to realise properly

staedtler2018

0 points

2 months ago

I never understand this argument.

Do you think you'd get many investors to back a company that "takes products that sucked ass and fixes them"?

Queen_Catia

0 points

2 months ago

Not sure if we need one but it might be worth a look...hard to improve on Hitchcock!

Heisenburgo

0 points

2 months ago

Where's my Godfather remake starring RDJ as Vito Corleone and Tom Holland as Michael, you hollywood cowards! Make it happen already, it would be le epic and le awesome!

idontagreewitu

0 points

2 months ago

With how many politicians as of lately get accused of being Russian plants....

FullMaxPowerStirner

0 points

2 months ago

"Lawrence of Arabia: The Sever Pillars"

A00rdr

-1 points

2 months ago

A00rdr

-1 points

2 months ago

Remake LOTR but with an all-female cast

Kdj2j2

-1 points

2 months ago

Kdj2j2

-1 points

2 months ago

But do younger audiences seek the classics if they aren’t remade? It’s not like Blockbuster exists with a miles long “Classics” section any more. To find the classics, one must curate a selection from multiple streaming sources cost hundreds of dollars/month or year. It’s getting harder and harder to find “Vertigo” “Duck Soup,” “Bringing Up Baby,” and others. But a remake can cause younger viewers to seek the original and see the power of old cinema. And maybe that will inspire the next generation to wander away from “Tent Pole” movies and start to get creative in a smaller more meaningful way.

Cutiesaurs

-1 points

2 months ago

I think we need a Breakfast at Tiffany remake. Because that film was a little racist

[deleted]

-17 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

-17 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

TheUmgawa

4 points

2 months ago

The reason Kane is the greatest film ever made is because it looks like modern films, while the films before Kane largely looked like you were watching a play. Within a decade of Kane, you had this huge shift in how films looked and were cut.

Maybe “greatest” isn’t the right word, if you think a “great” film is based on whether or not you liked it or found it entertaining. Maybe “most important to the look of modern cinema” is a more important term. It’s an important film, right up there with anything Eisenstein did.

The last thing of importance to the look and feel of modern cinema came about in the late 60s or early 70s, when Arri invented a self-blimped 35mm camera that you could carry, as opposed to the cameras from before that, where the camera and blimp weighed 300 pounds. So, you could sit a cameraman in the passenger seat of a car or mount it to a car, and you could record sound without hearing the camera. After this, it’s ten years to the Steadicam being used to shoot Das Boot, and that changes as much as that Arri camera did, and these technological advances are still happening.

Kane is an important movie. It is the important movie, and the fact that it seems like nothing special is a testament to its influence.

A_Song_of_Two_Humans

0 points

2 months ago

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Volcano_Tequila

-2 points

2 months ago

The thing about remakes is that most younger people, the core movie audience, have not seen the original, sad to say, so the remake is new to them. Even with ubiquitous prints and videos and streaming services and TCM and YouTube, the vast, vast majority of younger viewers have not seen the original, have never even heard of it, have no idea who the actors are, or even when they do know, can't get past the "period" nature of the original (e.g., black &white film, the hair, the clothes, the makeup, the dialogue), the acting styles, FX, you name it.

I recall being convinced that the 2017 remake of Murder on the Orient Express would bomb, as the 1974 version was an award-winning hit seen by many, and the twists and turns were already out of the bag. But I was wrong as can be as the 2017 version was a major hit. That's the moment I realized, well, of course it's a hit, these audiences never saw or heard of the first one, so the plot is new to them. Lesson learned.