I am sick of all the film remakes. Many of the originals were perfectly fine the first time around and nothing was gained by the remake. Here are some examples of films that didn’t need to be remade:
Last House on the Left
Let The Right One In
Planet of the Apes
Now sometimes the remake is equal to or superior to the original movie. The best example is “True Grit.” The Coen Brothers remake is much better than the one starring John Wayne. Sure, Wayne won the Oscar for his performance but that was more of a lifetime achievement award.
Other outstanding remakes are “His Girl Friday” and John Carpenter’s “The Thing” which I love as much as the Howard Hawks original. However, now a remake of the John Carpenter version is coming out. There’s no need for that. That is why I want to establish the True Grit Rule. Unless you can make a film that is as good as or superior to the original, then don’t bother.
In fact, I want to take this one step further. As a real challenge to filmmakers, they should only be allowed to remake bad films. Many films start out as a good idea but somewhere in the execution, something goes wrong and a turkey is born instead of a classic. Why not take one of these mistakes and correct it? A possible example of this is the planned remake of “Logan’s Run.” Or better yet, take something that was a bad idea to begin with and see if you can find a way to make it work.
I’m not suggesting an impossible challenge like “The Beast of Yucca Flats” or “Glen or Glenda.” But then again, why not remake “Santa Claus conquers the Martians” into a cleverly written campy holiday romp?
Here are some movies whose original premise didn't entirely suck, but came out bad and have the potential to be remade into decent movies:
Dan In Real Life
Okay, maybe “Glen or Glenda” has a better chance at being remade into a decent film than “Gigli.” At least people know how to pronounce Glen and Glenda.