Have you ever seen a re-make of a movie that was better tha the original?

@burrito88 (2774)
United States
September 10, 2010 9:24pm CST
Movies and TV show a lack of originality demonstrated by re-making movies, TV shows into movies, movies into TV shows. Some are successful. TV MASH worked although it was vastly different than movie MASH. However, more often we have mini-series The Shining, being a waste of film compared to Jack Nicholson in the movie. Then you had the great war movie Sahara (with Humphrey Bogart) remade with Jim Belushi as a pale imitation. What are your thought on this?
1 person likes this
13 responses
@ElicBxn (63594)
• United States
11 Sep 10
the Sahara with Humphrey Bogart was a completely different movie than the Sahara that was based off the Clive Cussler's book. The book was good, the movie sucked. and I really don't know that I've ever seen ANY version of War of the Worlds that even meet the book (unless you are talking about Sherlock Holmes' War of the Worlds.) tho the rock opera was a good version
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
11 Sep 10
I ws not referring to the movie based on the Cussler book, which is different story. I've only seen the Belushi movie on TV and there's no way he could hold Bogart's jockstrap. I agree, most of the War of the Worlds movies are bad. The '50's movie starring Gene Barry probably comes closest to the book.
2 people like this
@ElicBxn (63594)
• United States
11 Sep 10
I had a friend over and he said "they are remaking Tron" I told him, "not a remake - a sequel" and then had go to the site and show him...
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
11 Sep 10
Jeff Bridges is back as Flynn but now Flynn's son is the main character.
2 people like this
@Angelwriter (1954)
• United States
11 Sep 10
I'm not a fan of remakes in general, but there are some I like better than the original. This is more personal preference, because I'm not a Humphrey Bogart fan, but I liked the remake of Sabrina better than the original one. Also some remakes are pretty old themselves. A few years back, I saw a movie called Kind Lady. It was made in 1951 and was very good. Just this month, I found out that was a remake of an earlier 1930's movie. I saw that one, and thought the remake was much better.
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
29 Jun 12
Down to Earth was actually a remake of a 1947 movie with the same title. The 1947 movie was meant to be a sequel to Here Comes Mr. Jordan, so you are right in thinking that Chris Rock's movie was a follow up to Heaven Can Wait.
• Philippines
13 Sep 10
I have watched Heaven Can Wait a couple of times and I never get tired of it. Then sometime way back I got to watch a movie starring Chris Rock which more or less uses the same idea. Title of the movie is Down to Earth. Like in Heaven Can Wait he first gets reincarnated in a rich old man's body before finally ending up in the body of someone who gets to go out with the girl he falls in love with as well as someone who has the same profession. Since the movie stars Chris Rock expect a couple of funny light moments.
11 Sep 10
I would say the Zoltan Korda's version of "Sahara" from the 40s and starring Humphrey Bogart is easily the superior of the two versions, although if I remember rightly Belushi's version was made for TV rather than the big screen. In a side note, it's sort of amusing that so many people think of the Matthew McConaughey movie when you mention "Sahara" and not the Bogart or Belushi movies. As for the question, for me there are very few remakes which are better than the original and the one which springs to mind is "Ocean's 11" with George Clooney is superior to the original which features Sinatra and his Rat Pack buddies.
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
13 Sep 10
I have to admit, I haven't really seen the new version of Ocean's 11 or for tht matter much of the original. I could sort of see that the re-make might be better in that case because the stars were actors wheras in the original they were entertainers.
@chulce (1537)
• United States
11 Sep 10
Currently to date I have not seen a re-make that was/is better than the original. Given most classics it seems that there is more heart and energy and something special that was put into that original movie that just doesn't seem to be there with the newer versions. In my opinion a good example of this is a movie called "Yours, Mine and Ours" with Lucille Ball and Henry Ford. The movie is based on the true lives of the North Family, they were a navy family that had 18 children. The story line showed how the two characters met and fell in love. In the remake, well, they didn't stick to what the actual story was originally about, they changed it a great deal and if you actually know what the first was about, it is truly heart breaking that they could change it as much as they did. The fact that in the newer version, one the main character was shown to be in the Coast Guard, he actually knew the other lead from his high school years (I believe) and many of the kids were actually adopted, it was strange that they makers decided to completely change what the true story was and not actually base it off of the real lives of those the movie was originally made about. Another remake, although the storyline was cute and worked and actually made the idea very popular is the movie "Cheaper by the Dozen". In the original, the father of the family actually ends up dying. Sad yes, but they did wait until the end of the movie. They did have 12 children and the movie was based around people that found it totally wrong that they did. In the newer version, it was actually shown to be fun in many aspects and did not show to much of the mean side of people who don't care for the concept of bigger families.
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
13 Sep 10
It was Henry Fonda in the original, not Henry Ford. I think we lose sight of Lucille Ball, the move actress, because she did so much TV later in her career and most of that was more of the slapstick sort of variety. If you go way back, she was once considered a potentially great leading lady.
@chulce (1537)
• United States
14 Sep 10
Thanks for the correction. I did mean to say Fonda and not Ford. Sorry about that, but we all have those moments of forgetting things. Heck, there are days I wonder if I can remember to tie my own shoelaces.
@o0jopak0o (6394)
• Philippines
11 Sep 10
well i like the sahara remake. there are a lot of remaked movies that are good but most of them are just same themed but generally a different movie. i like both the remake and the original of karate kid.
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
11 Sep 10
There are three moves with this title. The version I am talking about involves a lone American tank in World War Two that stops an advance be a much larger German infantry unit. Again the Bogart version is a classc.
1 person likes this
@o0jopak0o (6394)
• Philippines
13 Sep 10
if your talking the one with jim belushi then yes
• Philippines
11 Sep 10
The best remake i've seen so far is Batman. Christian Bale had a nice idea of what Batman should look and speak like. The director also did a nice job. They made this movie more "realistic" than the previews ones.
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
11 Sep 10
I think all the movie versions are better than the '60's TV show, which was popular when it started burned out quickly.
1 person likes this
• Canada
12 Sep 10
But Batman has never really seen true "remakes"... its been more like new episodes. Even the most recent Batman, with the Joker coming back, wasn't a copy of the earlier Batman movie by Tim Burton. The plot was completely different, the theme was different, the characters were different... the only thing that was the same, was the reappearance of some of the characters... so it's much more like a sequel or prequel, then a remake.
• Philippines
12 Sep 10
It's pretty clear that Batman Begins is a remake. You can see the hint from the title itself. It's pretty obvious. Just so you understand what a remake and a sequel is, a remake is a total reconstruction of a movie and a sequel or a prequel is taking a certain part of the main timeline of the story that wasn't included in the movie and making a movie out of it. You can look it up on the web. I'm sure you'll find a lot of resources that'll tell you the difference.
@danitykane (3183)
• Philippines
12 Sep 10
hello burrito88, I like Brady Bunch Movie (remake in 1995) and A Very Brady Sequel. LOL! Honestly, I like Brady Bunch and its remake is a funny treat for me. I got to watch it again on HBO a couple of weeks ago and I still like it. There are few horror film remakes that I love such as The Eye, The Ring and The Grudge ~ I like the american version of these films.
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
29 Jun 12
The Brady Bunch movies weren't really remakes of movies but movie attempts at redoing TV an old TV series. They don't redo a movie plot. In that manner, the movie Maverick is not really a remake of the TV series, nor are the Mission Impossible movies remakes of that show. Plus all the movies and TV shows for Superman, young Superman, or Superboy, are not remakes of the '50's TV show Superman, that starred George Reeves.
@anurag3786 (6267)
• India
11 Sep 10
I don't believe that remake is better than original movies.. and yet i have not seen any remake movie in my life.. which is really good than their original..I think only original is better than any remake.. movies..
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
29 Jun 12
Well, there are a few different remakes mentioned in this discussion so you could try viewing some if you get a chance.
@Metatronik (6199)
• Pasay, Philippines
12 Sep 10
I think I have seen it but I can't remember the title. But we have so bunch of remakes in our television series that is not necessarily better than the original. Sometimes it sounds like a trash. I am already pissed off about it but depends on the program.
• India
11 Sep 10
Yea I have seen it . There was film which was called GHAJINI in TAMIL language . The film was super duper hit . Seeing its success . The producer decided to launch it in HINDI . The film was also called as ghajini in hindi . That film in HINDI gained huge money and was regarded as the best film ever !
1 person likes this
• China
11 Sep 10
I personally think the original ones are always better than the remake ones
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
29 Jun 12
That was part of what I was driving at by starting this discussion.
@curly90 (46)
• Malaysia
11 Sep 10
many would argue this but i think texas chainsaw massacre (2008) was better partly because of the costume and make-up..
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
13 Sep 10
The original probably had moreshock value because it was the original
@PageTurner (2825)
• United States
25 Jun 12
Hello burrito88 I enjoyed the remake of the movie, Funny Games, more than the original. It may be because the original was in German, with subtitles, and the remake was in English, therefore, I was able to enjoy it more. Except for the language spoken, the location (the remake was set in the USA, and the actors these two movies were exactly the same, with the same scenes and the same dialogue. In fact, they were writte and directed by the exact same person. He just made the remake so that he would have a wider audience. Peace I love the word!!
@burrito88 (2774)
• United States
29 Jun 12
I took 5 years of German in junior high and high school and I still remember the teacher trying to tell German jokes and explain them. Nobody ever really understood them so we would just say "Deutsche Humor".
• United States
29 Jun 12
I only took two years of German in junior high school, but I can identify with what you're saying.