It's NOT A Remake!!!

Does anybody else get really annoyed when people misuse the term “remake”?

A friend of mine proclaimed the other day that ‘Dredd’ is the greatest remake ever. He deems the movie a remake of the Stallone flop that was ‘Judge Dredd’. I argued that that’s not the case, as they’re both just based on the same source material, so if that does constitute a remake, then ‘The Dark Knight’ must also be a remake of Tim Burtons ‘Batman’. He wasn’t having it…

I’ve also read how people can’t wait for the remake of ‘Carrie’ (starring Chloe Moretz, who was in the remake of ‘Let The Right One In’ ).

Thinking about it now, I don’t think I ever heard anybody call ‘Red Dragon’ a remake of ‘Manhunter’.

Anyhow, does this type of thing annoy anybody else? Or am I just too much of a nerd?

Nah, I agree with you.

A remake is a remake.
A different story using the same characters in a similar environment is NOT a remake.

I haven't seen Dredd so can't comment on it being a remake or not, but will easily take your word for it.
But I did just watch Total Recall which I would definitely call a remake of the 1990 film.
And Let Me In is a worthless remake of Let The Right One In, and I feel the same way about many of the Americanized nearly shot-for-shot remakes of foreign films just so that stupid lazy Americans don't have to be bothered with subtitles.

I didn't care for the remake of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.
I didn't care for the remake of The Eye.
I thought the remake of [REC] to Quarantine was fairly decent.
I liked the remake of The Thomas Crown Affair.
I didn't care for the remake of The Longest Yard


But, yeah. You've got a point.
Remakes and same world stories without being sequals ain't the same.

Yeah, they called The Amazing Spider-man a remake in several articles.

A reboot would be a good word, but that's also inaccurate.

It's just a new series... even the comics and TV shows work this way

I think sometimes the characterization, "reimagining," is not such a bad way to put it, in some cases, anyway.

Have you noticed that some fillmakers make a point of saying that their film is not a remake of a previous film, but a new adaptation of the source material? Tru Grit springs to mind as a recent example. In interviews that I heard, all involved seemed pretty intent on making it clear that it was based upon the book, not the earlier film.

But like you point out, Rayw, some films deserve to be called remakes when they are more-or-less shot-for-shot...well, remakes. Like Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Not that it was entirely shot-for-shot. It was more like an abridged shot-for-shot version of the mostly much better first film. And count me on board Rayw's annoyed by American remakes of already excellant non-english speaking films so lazy Americans don't have to read subtitles and so that Hollywood can make its money off a foreign movie that was alreay a hit.

Althoughhhhh, I can think of one example that they remade which, for my taste, was much better than the original and that I am glad they did remake (or whatever): The Birdcage!

Trying to think of any others. Hmmmm. Dunno. =)

You say potato, I say who gives a shit?

Don't get me wrong, I've had numerous conversations with friends in which I've had to explain to them that "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" is actually a re-boot, and "Star Trek" (2009) is neither a prequel, nor a re-boot, but more of an alternate timeline within the same universe. These distinctions are pretty nerdy, so, whatever.

That being said -- I do agree with you, regarding Dredd. It's a reboot. And yes, it is incredibly badass!

The 2001 Planet of the Apes would be a remake. I think the 2012 Total Recall would be a remake cause it is based on the 1990 movie more than it is based on the original source material, I am right? But I think I know the difference. Dawn of the Dead (2004), King Kong (2005), and The Girl With the Dragon Tatoo are remakes. Does the Departed count as a remake, or more like an inspiration? The changed a lot around, but a lot was changed around in The Fly (1986) remake, and that is still considered a remake, isn't it?

I suppose there is a very grey area here.

I’d say ‘The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo’ isn’t a remake, as it’s just another version of the novel. Do those of you who call ‘…Dragon Tattoo’ a remake, also consider ‘Red Dragon’ a remake?

As per usual, I’m just playing devil’s advocate here, cause I actually consider films such as ‘The Ring’ and ‘Dark Water’ to be remakes, even though, by my own definition, they’re not.

I’d also say that ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ is nothing more than a prequel. It is designed to lead into the original planet of the apes, is it not? **

As for ‘The Fly’, that truly is a grey area. It’s based on the same story, but it’s nothing like that story or the original movie. For me, Cronenberg’s film is far superior. But is it really a remake? I don’t know.



**Only slightly off topic, but another question… Does anybody else find the relationship between ‘Batman Begins’ and TDK/TDKR a little strange? I always thought of BB as a prequel to Tim Burtons ‘Batman’, as I believe it was intended. When TDK was released, I just accepted it as a whole new series. Having watched the whole trilogy again recently, the tone of BB is completely different to TDK/TDKR. It just kind-of bothered me.

This may already have been addressed by the Nolans, but I can’t seem to find anything...

This really bugged me with Dredd. Here in the UK, the film did quite well as there's a better general knowledge of the 2000AD comic book and the adaptation was well associated with the source material.

In the US though, it seems 2000AD isn't well known, and in just about every article or comment I read, Dredd was referred to as a remake of the Stallone film. I wouldn't be bothered if the film had done well overseas, but it didn't.

The weak marketing campaign was to blame aswell. Really needed something a bit more potent to override the memory of that 1995 piece of junk.