What movie remakes should try to be
Whether you love ’em or hate ’em, they’re never going away.
Not real, but interesting to think about.
Remaking anything is a difficult task. You have to live to the standards of the past and hope you still stand up. Is it even worth remaking? Will it be as good as the first? Should I change something vital to better the overall experience?
I personally enjoy remakes. As long as the original still exists, I don’t see anything wrong with enjoying another take on the same premise. I would like to know what a different writer or producer can do with what’s given. But, that also begs another question: When are remakes worth making?
The answer can be changed depending on the medium; but overall, you have to decide whether the original material stands to be remade. Some movies may get remakes when the original story has aged and people want to revise it for a modern audience, others to simply bring a new light to how the original material. Going back to Spider-Man, each of the three remakes have had different villains and a slightly different take on how Spider-Man is portrayed.
In the originals, especially in the second and third films, Spider-Man is a man fresh out of school and the subject matter focuses on how he balances normal life with being Spider-Man. The second film focused heavily on that by having the hero lose his powers in conjunction with the love of his life about to be married to another man. In the recent Spider-Man: Homecoming, the story instead focuses on a young, still in school; this Spider-Man is balancing his views on how super heroes should act verses the reality of the situation at hand.
Three different stories, three different overall problems, but at heart, they are still the same. New ideas brought to an already existing universe.
That’s what a remake should be. That’s when remakes are worth making. If you can change many things for the better, while still keeping the heart of the film intact, then that is the sign of a good remake. Fix what’s wrong with something, add in situations and perspectives not previously explored, all without losing what may have made the film beloved in the first place.
Loading ...Your donation will support the student journalists of Wiregrass Ranch High School. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.
Keegan Moore is a senior at Wiregrass Ranch High School and this is his first year writing for The Stampede. Keegan is an officer in Gaming club. His...
Tara Hommel • Mar 11, 2018 at 7:37 pm
Remakes for action movies or superhero’s can be fun to watch a new view or a new adaptation of an old character. But in my opinion, some movies specifically dramas can be very tricky. When a character becomes so ingrained in the story itself and the actor used to portray that person BECOMES in your heart that person, changing the character feels wrong somehow. For example: Tom Hanks as Forest Gump. Who could eever be better than him? Who could ever warm your hearts and leave such a deep impression? Or Al Pacino as Tony Montana?
These are just 2 examples where an actor BECAME those characters so deeply in our hearts and minds that a remake would never live up to our expectations and thus be a disappointment to most.
Thanks for the article and the interesting questions it raises on when or why a remake is good/bad idea.