• Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Remakes: What's the Point of Them?

I was going to say "for the directors/writers to screw it up in their own way!
UnoffGWcrazylaugh.gif
", but "lolmoney" and "ran out of ideas" work too.

Except that they don't work.

We're never gonna run out of ideas. Period.
 

The_Boss_Giygas

I. F.E.E.L. G.O.O.D.
Movies are not about story anymore they're all about flashy realistic graphics of fictional things and that's what the simple youth of today wants. So they will continue to use the same ol story just add more "hip" or "modern" touches & acting, while adding as much special effects as possible because it's what makes them rich.
 
I don't really support the idea of remakes and such.
Mainly because it brings in a new fanbase which denies the existence of anything previous to said remake, or believes everything about it is better. :/

Just let a classic be classic and be done with it.
 

ForeverFlame

Well-Known Member
I don't hate remakes/sequels/3D movies in general, I just hate how companies are constantly jumping on the bandwagon because other companies tried it and succeeded.

One of the biggest examples is Sony. The Dark Knight did well, so now they're going for a "grittier" Spider-man. Avatar did well, so it's in 3D. Why can't they be original and make original decisions instead of copying other studios' decisions? Most of the time it doesn't even end up well. Dragonball: Evolution was supposed to be 20th Century Fox's Transformers, and look how that ended up.
 

BCVM22

Well-Known Member
The Dark Knight did well, so now they're going for a "grittier" Spider-man.

...if they're rebooting the film series and starting over with Peter in high school (which they are), that would pretty clearly indicate that they're not going for "gritty", wouldn't it?

"Peter Parker is going back to high school when the next Spider-Man hits theaters in the summer of 2012. Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced today they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager dealing with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises."

Seriously. Where do you get "ZOMG GRITTY!" from that?

Avatar did well, so it's in 3D.

Yes, and what's wrong with that? It's a different means of making and viewing a movie; are you going to complain because every studio releases on Blu-ray and DVD now? Is that "ZOMG COPYING!" too?

It seems like you're more intent on just ranting and raving over stuff than you are on actually being sensible.
 
Last edited:

MKFC

Shade of Blue
So they can make more money.

Out of a graphically-enhanced somehwat worse movie than the classic.

They always that graphical enhances = a better movie. Boy, are they wrong.
 

Krake

Flabebe's Kids
Because remakes usually help an old franchise. I really don't expect kids this day and age to be clamoring to see an old movie when they can see the remake.
 

cascade88

< go ask alice >
It can be used to (a) draw in new fans to the franchise, (b) attempt to recapture the original 'magic' that came with the first entry into any given series, or because (c) they were bored/lacked originality.

I don't think remakes are always a bad thing, but generally, they're not as needed as often as they're done.
 

octoboy

I Crush Everything
Why remakes? So that people won't have to pull out film reels and a movie projector to see their favourite book cinematized. Okay, maybe that's an exaggeration, but check out, for example, the first movie version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. All those old-fashioned special effects look pretty hokey to the modern eye, do they not? Now, a remake's been produced, and anybody wanting to watch a movie of that book can see one with effects that are acceptable to the modern eye. That is likely the thoughts behind remakes.

Though remakes do have a pretty bad double-edged sword going against them: There's the one side that always comes with the movies based on literature, which complains that the book was better than the movie, and then there's the other side, that complains that the first movie was better. That is something every movie maker must face.

...Unless, of course, the remake isn't one of a book-based movie. In which case, there seems little point. Ok, maybe Broadway musicals and possibly comic books are up for more than one big screen version, but remaking a movie that was based on nothing seems kind of silly. Though maybe one can argue for the point of a remake of a well-liked, but outdated action flick.

*pants* Long, blabbering talk done. Expect more like this the next time I visit the Misc. Discussion forum.
 

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
Because Hollywood is dead. Look at films due in 2011 and 2012. Almost all of the big ones are either...

1. Sequels

2. Adaptions of Books/Comic Books

3. In 3D

or 4. Remakes

At first I was okay with book adaptions, one or two sequels, decent remakes, and some 3D movies (when it's done properly like in Avatar), but now it's being overblown.

Look at the Spiderman reboot! I would consider it to be a sequel, it's a remake, it's a comic book adaption, and it's in 3D.

One day movie-goers are going to realize how overdone these things are, and Hollywood's going to drop like the stock market during the Great Depression.
Yep and ain't that the truth. From the look of things it seems like they've almost run out of ideas.

And as for 3D... I'm not really a fan of it per say. And like you said, it's being overdone. Heck I just read an article about how companies are going to be coming out with 3D tvs... now who in their right mind (no offense to any 3D fans out there) -- would go and buy one of those? Especially considering the kind of economy that we're going through?

It just sounds like another kind of wasteful spending to me.

Seconded. They're going to get sick and tired of it one day, and hopefully Hollywood will take the hint.
 

warnerbroman

the Blue trainer
are you exited to play HGSS yes?

then that's the point.
 
Last edited:
Yep and ain't that the truth. From the look of things it seems like they've almost run out of ideas.

And as for 3D... I'm not really a fan of it per say. And like you said, it's being overdone. Heck I just read an article about how companies are going to be coming out with 3D tvs... now who in their right mind (no offense to any 3D fans out there) -- would go and buy one of those? Especially considering the kind of economy that we're going through?

It just sounds like another kind of wasteful spending to me.

Seconded. They're going to get sick and tired of it one day, and hopefully Hollywood will take the hint.


I'm just gonna repeat what I said before....

The highest grossing movie of all time is an Original idea. Hollywood won't drop like the stock market, because guess what they just give you more of what you pay for. This 3D craze, its because of Avatar, so when people stop paying for unoriginal idea (more on this in the second paragraph) Hollywood will stop paying for unoriginal ideas.

And guess what, unoriginal ideas aren't ever going to stop being popular, people pay for a film based on whether its good or not. Not based on if its original or not. The Dark Knight is (aside from its extremely annoying fanboys) one of the best films of all time, and its box office reflects that. People aren't suddenly all going to wake up and say that 'Gee you know what, despite great films being released every year, I only see the ones that aren't original so I'm getting tired of this now I'm going to stop seeing films all together.' Hollywood offers all kinds of films, YOU decide which ones your going to see.

3D is where film is going, obviously costs are going to go down, its not going to be that expensive forever.
 

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
I'm just gonna repeat what I said before....

The highest grossing movie of all time is an Original idea. Hollywood won't drop like the stock market, because guess what they just give you more of what you pay for. This 3D craze, its because of Avatar, so when people stop paying for unoriginal idea (more on this in the second paragraph) Hollywood will stop paying for unoriginal ideas.

And guess what, unoriginal ideas aren't ever going to stop being popular, people pay for a film based on whether its good or not. Not based on if its original or not. The Dark Knight is (aside from its extremely annoying fanboys) one of the best films of all time, and its box office reflects that. People aren't suddenly all going to wake up and say that 'Gee you know what, despite great films being released every year, I only see the ones that aren't original so I'm getting tired of this now I'm going to stop seeing films all together.' Hollywood offers all kinds of films, YOU decide which ones your going to see.

3D is where film is going, obviously costs are going to go down, its not going to be that expensive forever.

It probably won't -- but it will be affected in someway.

I guess they won't be, since people still go to see movies in the end.

If it is -- then like you said, costs will come down. I still won't be getting anything for it like tv's though. It's something I don't need as a movie goer. If I want to go and see a 3D movie, I'll go to a movie theater and see it there.
 
It probably won't -- but it will be affected in someway.

I guess they won't be, since people still go to see movies in the end.

If it is -- then like you said, costs will come down. I still won't be getting anything for it like tv's though. It's something I don't need as a movie goer. If I want to go and see a 3D movie, I'll go to a movie theater and see it there.

You won't see 3D tvs become standard until around 2030s.

Right now everyone just got an HD Tv

Five years from now you'll get LED tvs which will be a lot smaller in size then the huge HD tvs we have right now.

Five years from that you'll get OLED tvs again smaller in size.

Then you get the huge LED five years, and huge OLED five years.

Even after than they still have make 3D camera's standard, so by 2030 you'll get fully functioning 3D tvs, and then they have to make the ones without the glasses bigger.

So yeah, the most advanced TV available right now will become standard in about 30 years, after that theres no telling where we're gonna go.
 

Dante Falls

Doppelgänger
You won't see 3D tvs become standard until around 2030s.

Then you get the huge LED five years, and huge OLED five years.

So yeah, the most advanced TV available right now will become standard in about 30 years, after that theres no telling where we're gonna go.

Sony's already marketing a proto OLED TV. It's not going to take 30 years before it becomes mass marketting on a Home-Cinema scale. The demand for higher definition and resolution TV's seem to be pretty great, and considering that OLED TV's already exist, I'm guessing it'll be 10~15 years before we properly see them comercially.

That is, if they don't invent a better alternative first.
 
...
Wouldn't it be great if real life were in 3D? ITS LIKE IT WOULD POP OUT AT--oh wait.
Seeing it in 3D is just an excuse to pay a couple extra bucks to get some glasses you don't even get to keep, for something that's not so great.
I've seen a couple movies in 3D, and just because something is remade in 3D and what-not doesn't mean it'll be great.
 

Dante Falls

Doppelgänger
...
Wouldn't it be great if real life were in 3D? ITS LIKE IT WOULD POP OUT AT--oh wait.
Seeing it in 3D is just an excuse to pay a couple extra bucks to get some glasses you don't even get to keep, for something that's not so great.
I've seen a couple movies in 3D, and just because something is remade in 3D and what-not doesn't mean it'll be great.

We get to keep the glasses we buy when we go to Cinéworld :D

Or, whenever we go to Empire, secretly keep them under our coats. Apparantly they have security tags on them, but no sensors at the doors...

But I agree, 3D is such a gimmick. Seems less defined that regular, alongside the fact that 2D already gives you adequate depth persion :/ Any 3D film I see, I tend to forget the fact that it's in 3D half way through, it doesn't seem to make much difference.

Anyway, we had 3D theatres, then went to 2D cinemas. The next logical step is 1D :D
 

noobers

ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ノ
...
Wouldn't it be great if real life were in 3D? ITS LIKE IT WOULD POP OUT AT--oh wait.
Seeing it in 3D is just an excuse to pay a couple extra bucks to get some glasses you don't even get to keep, for something that's not so great.
I've seen a couple movies in 3D, and just because something is remade in 3D and what-not doesn't mean it'll be great.

Like I said, if you didn't see Avatar in 3D, then you only saw half the movie. It's a lot more immersive in 3D. Also, I got to keep my Hannah Montana: Best of Both Worlds Concert 3D glasses...
 
Top