Sadly this is both a blessing and a curse! I agree with you that John Carpenter's The Thing is without a doubt one of the best remakes ever, if not best remake ever! Sadly Hollywood has become complacent and now relies on old TV shows and movies trying desperately to recapture what made the original so good and made them so much money! Sadly there have been way more failures in remakes and reboots than success! I truly wish Hollywood would get a clue and stop making all of these God awful remakes and reboots! We want to see something new not the same old stories told over and over again! With all the remakes and reboots I am starting to think that Hollywood is out of new ideas! Truly sad, I really used to enjoy going to the movies first with my Dad and later with my daughter. But the new movies that are really worth seeing are few and far between! I hate to be the one to break it to Hollywood but not every remake or reboot for that matter will be as good as John Carpenter's The Thing! Take a chance and try something new!
it was not a remake. they went back to the original story and did numerous versions of the script. the Hawks version does not feature a shape shifting alien like the original story and Carpenter's film...
La Jetée is one of the most incredible films I've ever seen. I still have no idea how you can make such a profound, emotionally devastating film using almost nothing but still photos and a voiceover. Only 30 minutes long, everyone should give it a chance.
It's set after World War 3, and a bunch of scientists are performing time travel experiments on a prisoner. It's an unbelievably engaging watch, and the ending took my breath away.
Oddly, this was actually not the first disaster movie spoof. Four years earlier, there was "The Big Bus". I don't know that it had any specific connection to any previous film, however.
Ben-Hur (1959) is an example of a great remake. There were two made before that, one in 1907 and one in 1925. The 1959 one is x10 better than the other two.
Can you really call these films "remakes," especially the 1925 & the 1959, when they are all based on the same novel? Aren't they new versions of the book as opposed to remakes of previous films? Is the 1939 The Hunchback of Notre Dame a remake of the Lon Chaney silent, or is it just a new adaptation of the book?
Thank you for including "Nosferatu". Both Murnau's silent version and Herzog's 1979 update are beautiful in their differing styles, sharing not only source material, but a genuine uncanniness.
DREDD 2012 - now that's what you call a remake, when you hear the film flopped but got the budget back just by home video and streaming - that's says a lot.
Dredd wasn´t a remake of the Stallone movie, it was a second adaptation the source material, not just a remake of the first one. It is rather close to the comics (the source material) but has virtually NOTHING in common with the first adaptation. They didn´t even want to remake that shitty Sly movie, as it sucks damn hard.
Drax The Destroyer - As a big child fan of the original 2000ad comic strip I was so ready to hate that movie based on the trailers, but not for the first time they did it no justice. It’s far from perfect but it’s very enjoyable, and a massive improvement on Stallone’s try (tho that’s not totally terrible neither) and visually, wow!
I would certainly say it counts as a remake if The Thing does. Both are adaptations from an original source that go in vastly different directions, and Dredd was a great film.
You could say that the Dredd (2012) was a remake of The Raid: Redemption (2011). Very much in line with the #3 choices (Same Story, Different Interpretation).
hmmm I enjoyed the remake much more than the original... (feel free to hate me now, I don't give a fuck xD) *HOW'D IT GET BURNED?!?!?!?!* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vzrDpj6M1ig.html
I think is not about originality (although it surely helps), but about a purpose beyond mere profit. Haneke's remake on Funny Games is not original in the common sense of the word, but it is interesting because it has an interesting purpose, hence an interesting result.
Absolutely! There’s some kind of artistic intent involved in that remake, which is important. It doesn’t guarantee that the remake will be good, but it helps justify its existence
SlasherIncorporated I didn't. Most of the films that I've seen from the 70's, 60's, 50's or earlier, I've watched because they had a remake. Films like 'Psycho' (1998) I liked, so I decided to go back and watch the original. Films prior to the 70's don't interest me otherwise, no matter how many people say there's some excellent films in those periods.
Daniel Gardecki That's really sad...even though I'm kind of in the same boat, so I can't rag on you too much for it. I can go back a little further than you can, but not by much. Films prior to the 60's I generally cannot watch and have no interest in seeing. There have been some exceptions, but not too many. A lot of them I also did see because I saw the remake first and wanted to check out the original to compare and see how they both stack up to each other. Sometimes I wish it wasn't like that, though.
Frank Conrad Never Say Never Again is not part of the official Bond series, it was made as a result of a legal battle over the rights of the Thunderball book.
I agree with the comment that Thunderball and Never Say Never Again are the same film. I believe at the time NSNA came out the comparison was quickly made in the media. Personally I prefer Thunderball. Not a difficult choice I would say.
I disagree. It was an attempt to be closer to the original source material than the 1971 film, which even though was partially written by Dahl himself deviates from the book in many ways.
@@dianamgallagher Sorry but the Coen brothers take on True Grit is objectively better. It captures the gritty dirty ways of rooster far better than the original. John Wayne was an awful choice he's too much of a goody 2 shoes type actor he just doesn't work
This list is the number one reason why cinefix will always be the best top ten channel: it’s because they choose obscure, underrated films for their picks rather just the typical, popular choice for a list. You guys are awesome and you should stay awesome!
Wait! 1987s "Der Himmel über Berlin"/"Wings of Desire" vs 1998s "City of Angels". Holy Mackerel! What a pathetic re-make! Bah! Horrid! Everyone should watch the original...
You guys are the amazing!!!!!!!!!! Keep the amazing work up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! please some do some top ten videos for: 1) music scores 2) comedy characters 3) sequels 4) franchises 5) cameos 6) musicals 7) fourth wall breaks
I like it although my favorite will always be the 1933 original, Just one little gripe I have about Jackson's remake is that Kong manhandles Ann Darrow in such a way that every bone in her body would have been broken multiple times, In the 1933 original film Kong handled her delicately and carefully being she was his treasure and he loved her.
cha5 BUT. You're forgetting the most important factor, which is the connection between the characters. It was practically non existent in the 1933 original, Ann was always scared of Kong, but in the 2005 version, it was so believable and emotional that you feel for both of them. It makes a huge difference and is a very important factor for the story.
Good choices. Although, I found "Infernal Affairs" to be my choice over the remake, "The Departed". Thanks for the info on "Twelve Monkeys", I didn't know about the original French version. Now, I wanna seek it out. EDIT: I just watched "La Jetee". It's amazing what Chris Marker did with still images. And the one moment of movement was perfect.
Wow, your picks were pretty esoteric in my opinion. I really liked True Grit (Coen bros.) with Jeff and Matt - no disrespect to John Wayne, but the remake was better in every way except that it didn't have John Wayne himself. The sharp, no-contractions dialog (suggesting the story being told by a formal, adult Mattie) was hilariously done by Bridges and Damon, oh and the horse trader, too. Soderbergh's Ocean's Eleven has been mentioned, and I loved it, too. I love that y'all's expertise is so broadly informed, but it's sometimes a little out of my neighborhood, so to speak.
That True Grit was a great remake and should be mentioned. I don't usually care if remakes are "better" than the original to not-- I don't usually look to art (which the world seems to have forgotten film is these days...) as a competition, and with film remakes it gets tricky because we're comparing two things from the same idea but they can't possibly be equal because of the time periods and other differences in abilities and resources. The formal Mattie really helps the film immensely, and I took it as less "adult" (though she is) and more showing a product of how people actually talked when focused on education of those days. It was near-religion. The horse trader-- fantastic. I also agree with the way they are so informed here, but at times (and it' gets heavier with other subject) they flex the academia beyond reason.
For a "list" video, this was surprisingly good. It wasn't just listing the movies from worst best to best best (lol). It separated the genre and each choice was distinct. I actually learned something.
This channel always does that. They don't just show you their choices, they walk you through an abbreviated version of their selection process and explain why they chose what they chose.
Cirrus Tate Yes, I _always_ learn something when I watch their videos. I love it when people who are passionate about their interest gets to express it.
Billy Wilder's comedy classic Some Like It Hot is a remake. The original is an early 1950s German film called Fanfaren der Liebe, which literally translate as Fanfare of Love.
This thing just occurred to me, might be wildly wrong on this or sound a bit confusing but hear me out. No, a remake is not necessarily bad, however, what seems to be the problem here is that some of these films need to constatly remind us that they are remakes of beloved films and rely on riding too much on their original source material's back. What do I mean? Well, let's take Jurassic World, it feels that in order for you to enjoy the film you have to have seen the original, be a fan beforehand. While most of the best remakes try to make it interesting _by their own_ The Thing is seen such a good remake that most people don't even know about the original, why? Because it didn't try to appeal only for the fans, or go for the "remember that movie, remember how good it was? Let's try to do that again" but it added something new, so much so that one could enjoy both the original *and* the remake. Of course, don't take what I said as a rule, as with everything there are exceptions and also you might not think like I do, and that's fine too.
You guys are just great at what you do. I have never thought one of your lists to be wrong or supported by poor arguments; maybe I don't agree with it, but you always make your case. Well done to you guys.
I'm glad they referenced the David Niven/Marlon Brando caper comedy "Bedtime Story," that was remade as "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels," with Michael Caine and Steve Martin... scene by scene, totally fairhful to the original!
5:08 "Brat Pack original" Uh...how can a channel dedicated to cinema confuse the Rat Pack for the Brat Pack? Different decades, different genres, different everything.
One of my favorite remakes is James Mangold's "3:10 To Yuma." No one ever really talks about the movie, but it's one of my favorites. Near the end, when Ben (Russell Crowe) comes to an understanding with Dan (Christian Bale), and decides to help Dan make the deadline and be the father his son will be proud to look up to, always brings tears to my eyes. That's all I'll say. I wouldn't want to spoil the movie for anyone who hasn't seen it.
The original "The Thing..." is not all male. One argument in favour of the theory that Howard Hawks was the real director is the presence of witty, strong "Hawksian women."
Kathy Shaidle Agreed. I heard all male in regards to the original version of The Thing and i immediately thought “Wait... there were 2 women in that one.”
And there's a LOT more to "His Girl Friday" than just a romance. Hildy doesn't simply choose to drop Ralph Bellamy (like every other girl in Hollywood) and take up with Cary Grant (who could blame her?) - Hildy chooses HER CAREER over a man! For my money, that makes it one of the strongest feminist films made (well, at least of films made prior to 1970), and it was made in 1940. Also, "The Front Page" *isn't* a screwball comedy. "His Girl Friday" is. "The Front Page' is a rather serious story about the same general plot as "His Girl Friday" - the escaped prisoner, condemned to die, but probably innocent. That is more or less a McGuffin in "His Girl Friday" - it's there so Hildy can realise she wants to remain a reporter and not settle down and marry. In "The Front Page" the male reporter gets involved in the prisoner's escape and tries to figure out if he's guilty or not.
I didn't think Funny games would make the list (I'm happy it did) and you scared me when you showed "Let Me In," which is a terrible remake and I HATE the title change.
No it isn't, the original title is Låt den rätte komma in, which literally translates to Let the Right One In. A term that has its origins come from Vampire lore.
I actually kind of liked it. Especially compared to a lot of foreign to American remakes. But then again I had a bit of time between each piece of media. I watched Let The Right One In first. Then Let Me In. Finally the book. And I plan to read the sequel if it's any good. I don't think I have rewatched or reread anything since I've first seen them though. And they are all kind of ringing around in my head so I can't remember all the differences. I bought Let Me In recently, so I probably will re-watch it and compare it to what I remember of the book. It's actually something I wouldn't mind another remake of with more of everyone's perspectives, especially the guy who takes care of Eli. (Name starts with an H I think?)
Before The Credits You're right, my bad. I always thought they just translate it properly for the remake. I had this memory because they did translate it Let me in in Spanish when the original came out. And I know it comes from vampires it is even a plot point during the film.
Brad Pitt's character in "12 Monkeys" is one of my favorite performances of all time. I mean, everybody is great in that movie, but Pitt really sells it... I absolutely believed that he was certifiably nuts.
Wow. Sukiyaki Western Django and The Good, The Bad, and The Weird getting mentions in one video? Nice to see them getting some love. I really enjoyed the craziness of both those films.
Akira Kurasawa's 'Yojimbo' and its (originally unlicensed) remake 'A Fistful of Dollars. Same story, told essentially the same way, the only major change is the settings. During the Meiji reformation in Japan for 'Yojimbo' and the American 'Old West' for 'A Fistful of Dollars'.
Seriously, the "We all go a little mad sometimes" scene is some of the cringiest acting in cinema. Why is it even considered? Maybe for its shot-for-shot accuracy, I guess.
11.- The Fly (1986) 10.- Suspiria (2018) 9.- Planet of the Apes (2001) 8.- Ben-Hur (1959) 7.- Night of the Living Dead (1990) 6.- Let Me In (2010) 5.- The Thing (1982) 4.- True Grit (2010) 3.- A Fistful of Dollars (1964) 2.- 12 Monkeys (1995) 1.- Scarface (1983)
Really? No mention of how Alien is a remake of the 50s B-movie It! The Terror From Beyond Space (to the point of being a shot-for-shot remake at a few points).
#5...."You can remake something, if the original version isn't released with an English audio track!" #4..."You can remake something, if the original version is a short video that was released in the 1980's or an earlier time!" #3..."You can remake something, if the original version has lost its' luster after 30 years!" #2..."You can remake something, if it's refered as a 'Talkie'!" #1..."You can remake something, if it's an old movie that your only grandfather remembers!"
Best listicles on RU-vid. I wish there'd been a category for "boldest remake" the ones that dare to take beloved, canonized classics and not only remake them, but make a loooot of changes. These are films like Jim McBride's Breathless, Todd Haynes's reworking of Citizen Kane as Velvet Goldmine or the anime remake of Metropolis.
the order wasn't based on least to most good but instead how far it strayed from the original, and it's hard to beat terry gilliam remaking a narrated slideshow at that
I heard the Psycho remake is awful. I think that its good that it exists though. It shows the subtle differences between a great film and a terrible film that are supposed to be the same.
I never watched it because it was completely unnecessary. Also, the casting of Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates was laughable. Not to mention Anne Heche. The reason the original worked so well is that 1) Marion's death was a complete shock, since Janet Leigh was one of the biggest stars of the time. She was billed as the star of the movie. Scream did it better with Drew Barrymore. 2) Norman was perceived as a small, weak man who "couldn't hurt a fly." I can't picture Vince Vaughn as small or weak. A better choice would've been someone in the vein of Rick Moranis.
I love this channel a lot, but what i feel is left out is animation. Please do a "Five brilliant moments in animation" or ranking of funniest moments in animation or best animated action scenes? With animation theres so much control over every single frame that the slapstick and action can be perfected in a completely different way.
I know you mentioned it, I'm happy you did, and I think this goes without saying, but the 1959 Ben-Hur is absolutely INCREDIBLE. One of my favorite epics ever that even though it's a remake of an earlier work, still stands tall today, PARTICULARLY to that 2016 mess.
@@lukess.s I always believed the 1978 remake was superior to the 1956 original. I don't count the 1993 and 2007 remakes at all. While the original Invasion of Body Snatchers actually is a poorly hidden allegory for the red scare (communist paranoia) of the 1950's and sort of a preachy tale what happens if you become "one of them" the 1978 one had better acting, better writing and an eerie atmosphere which enhanced the movie. There's a human element which is lacking in the original.
"Pygmalion"/"My Fair Lady"/"Pretty Woman"/"She's All That" Is an amazing study of a remake of a remake of a remake. From small changes to large each bit shows the attitude of the era that they were release. check them out in a row if you have the time. Love that cockney accent in Pygmalion btw.
Really good list with a solid set of categories. Some other categories you hint at could have been "Reimagined adaptions from alternate media" which is mainly from books but could be TV shows, plays, fairy tales, etc. and "Change of culture/language" remakes. Maybe you should remake this video (as a serious joke) with 10 categories to retroactively fix the mistake at the 00:20 mark.
