|ZiR| said:
I mean, most of you liked it, so I'm sure it's O.K. an' all. But I just hate Russel Crowe, and I'm against remakes in general.
I hate Russel Crowe and remakes and I
still liked it.
Worst remakes ever:
Psycho (Anne Heche)
Planet of the Apes (Marky Mark and the Junky Bunch)
Time Machine (Guy Pierce)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (Tim Burton)
Parent Trap (Lindsay Lohan)
Freaky Friday (Lindsay Lohan one sucked, the Shelley Long one was ok)
Best remakes:
Oceans 11 (George Clooney)
Bedazzled (Brendan Fraser)
Scrooged (Bill Murray)
Count of Monte Cristo (Jim Caveziel)
The Mummy (Brendan Fraser)
Little Women (Winona Ryder)
The Three Musketeers (Disney Kiefer Sutherland version)
Sleepy Hollow (Johnny D)
Of course that's my own opinion and some of those aren't *technically* what people usually refer to as remakes. I think it's ok to remake a movie if 1) not a lot of people have heard of it or if 2) a re-imagining is unique enough to put a neat spin on it. (Like Taming of the Shrew=10 Things I Hate About You).
I'd love to see a Tim Burton version of my favorite movie, "The 7 Faces of Dr. Lao" (George Pal/Tony Randall). Mostly because the original has some neat 1960s stop-motion but it looks ridiculous by today's standards. I think Burton would be a good choice because he would remake the movie with updated stop-motion effects (instead of using the modern crutch of CGI effects). Plus I think Johnny Depp or Kevin Spacey would make an AWESOME Dr. Lao. (I mean one man playing 7 fantasy characters including Merlin, Pan, Medusa, and the Abominable Snowman--how great would that be???)
Also, even though I liked the remake to Bedazzled, I ALSO loved the original (Peter Cook and Dudley Moore). So there isn't really a rule saying that if you like one you have to dismiss or hate the other. After all, one would hope the intention of the director is to pay homage to the original in some fashion (like how Time Machine's director is a direct descendant of H.G. Wells--the author of the original story).