Expandmenu Shrunk


Sequels, Prequels, and Remakes: Are We Running Out of Ideas? Part 2

posted on January 12th, 2014

As I explained in Part 1, sequels are often used to expand or revamp old concepts. With that being said, it’s difficult to talk about sequels without mentioning remakes, which also seek to capitalize on previous films. This may include movie updates of old television shows such as Transformers and Americanized versions of foreign flicks such as The Birdcage based off the French film La Cage Aux Folles. Like sequels, these seem to be more prevalent now than ever with remakes of About Last Night, Endless Love, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles set to premiere this year. However, remakes might have an even worse reputation than sequels because either they’re thought to be just retreading old ground or people love the original so much that even considering remaking what was already perfect would be cinematic blasphemy.

One example of a remake that should have never seen the light of day is 1998’s Psycho, a near shot for shot rip-off of the Hitchcock classic. The only real differences between the two are the actors, the time set, and the sixties version being shot in black and white. Ironically, these are the only differences necessary to make the remake a far inferior film. Even if the camera angles, music, sets, and dialogue can be replicated down to the letter, the one thing that absolutely could not be replicated were the iconic performances of Janet Leigh as Marion Crane and Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates. Though not for lack of trying, Anne Heche and Vince Vaughn as the leads don’t even come close to bringing the depth and subtle nuances to the characters that the original actors brought to the roles. It doesn’t help that the original 1960’s dialogue feels out of place in a 1990’s setting. In a nutshell, Gus Van Sant’s Psycho is what an Alfred Hitchcock movie is like…without Alfred Hitchcock. Remakes of other beloved older films such as 2004’s The Stepford Wives, 1999’s The Haunting, and 2008’s The Women also fall short from the originals.

On the other hand, there are plenty of remakes that are not only considered better than the original, but practically obscure the first version. Scarface (1983), Ben-Hur (1959), and even The Wizard of Oz (1939) are all famous classics that were remade from earlier versions. One of my personal favorites is the Coen Brothers’ True Grit (2010), remade from the 1969 version starring John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn. The first common mistake of remakes this one avoids is trying to imitate how the original actors played the characters, which in John Wayne’s case, was essentially playing himself. Not only do Jeff Bridges (Rooster Cogburn), Hailee Steinfeld (Mattie Ross), and Matt Damon (LaBoeuf) live up to their predecessors, they completely own their roles. The Coen’s version also takes full advantage of its’ post-Civil War “Old West” setting, being more realistic and–no pun intended–grittier than the original. This allows for a tad more violent and intense action scenes, along with some dark humor. I won’t spoil the movie for those who haven’t seen it, but I will say the remake ends on a bittersweet note, unlike the standard ‘riding off into the sunset’ ending of most westerns.

Copyright © 2014 moviepostershop.com
Copyright © 2014 moviepostershop.com

So the question remains: When is a remake warranted? Just like with prequels and sequels, it depends if there’s something new and interesting that can be done with the original source while retaining the core idea, or if it’s just attempting to make a profit off of nostalgia. The assumption that we can always take “old” or “outdated” movies, no matter how great they were already, and make them better than ever likely comes with ever-changing technology opening up endless possibilities. I’m not one to say Hollywood can’t make remakes or sequels to previous films, but just because something can be done doesn’t necessarily mean it should. Before updating iconic films, I only ask creators keep this in mind: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Copyright © 2014 vulture.com
Copyright © 2014 vulture.com


4 Responses to Sequels, Prequels, and Remakes: Are We Running Out of Ideas? Part 2

  1. Totally agree with the Psycho argument. It seems blasphemous to remake a Hitchcock film! I actually really loved the True Grit remake. I’m a huge Coen brothers fan, and I think with an awesome cast and production it was definitely a job well done.

  2. Avatar Matthew Esposito
    Matthew Esposito says:

    I really enjoyed watching the True Grit remake. I agree that even though a film can make remakes or sequels doesn’t mean that it should be done.

  3. Avatar Chris Perkowski
    Chris Perkowski says:

    “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” is a great quote for this idea! I totally agree with the True Grit sentiment, as I loved the remake, all partly because of great performances from Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon, Hailee Steinfeld, Josh Brolin, and Barry Pepper and a good script and good camera techniques. It doesn’t hurt that the Coen Brothers are cinematic masterminds! You’re absolutely right, the Psycho remake should have never happened in a million years, because it is a Hitchcock film…Hitchcock films should never be remade, that should be a crime, and no one could match the sheer brilliance of Anthony Perkins in the role of Norman Bates. I think that if there is a good idea behind a remake or sequel, then they should go for it, but if it is just a cash play or an idea that is too far fetched (I believe Michael Bay is still making TMNT into aliens). Overall, another good post.

  4. I truly enjoy reading your post Alyssa Solazzo | Sequels, Prequels, and Remakes:
    Are We Running Out of Ideas? Part 2.


Copyright © 2017 Alyssa Solazzo All Rights Reserved.