On the “remakes suck” front where does everyone stand on Brian DePalma’s ‘Scarface’, David Cronenberg’s ‘The Fly’ and Martin Scorsese’s ‘Cape Fear’?
[quote=“Clinton Morgan”]
On the “remakes suck” front where does everyone stand on Brian DePalma’s ‘Scarface’, David Cronenberg’s ‘The Fly’ and Martin Scorsese’s ‘Cape Fear’?
[/quote]
Cape Fear is already a remake of Cape Fear from 1962 directed by John Lee Thompson. So a remake of a remake shouldnt be made!
That’s what he meant to say, Scarface and The Fly are also remakes. Scarface is a remake of the briliant Scarface (1932) by Howard Hawks.
I reconsider… MOST replays suck
pf remake? …uh… nope 
[quote=“Clinton Morgan”]
On the “remakes suck” front where does everyone stand on Brian DePalma’s ‘Scarface’, David Cronenberg’s ‘The Fly’ and Martin Scorsese’s ‘Cape Fear’?
[/quote]
There’s an exception to every rule. I also happen to love John Carpenter’s The Thing, The Dawn Of The Dead remake, Peter Jackson’s King Kong and Hitch’s remake of his own The Man Who Knew Too Much. But the probability’s always in favor of a remake sucking more than Pamela Anderson in her prime.
Has anybody seen ‘Plump Fiction’ with butch lesbian comedienne Lea De Laria (I think that’s how you spell her name) in the Uma Thurman role? Anyway there’s already a good remake of ‘Pulp Fiction’ starring some cartoon bunnies.
A PF remake would suck no matter what, because it’d either be an exact replica a la 98’s Psycho or they’d abandon the script completely and try something totally different. But if they did that, it would be NOTHING like the original because QT’s screenplay and the original story is what made the film so great and unique in the first place. Changing all the minor details and dialogues would A. make it more than likely inferior and B. make it a totally different film, so it wouldn’t really be justifiable to call it a “remake.” There have been lots of riffs on QT’s films over the past few years, but they haven’t necessarily been remakes.
A Pulp remake shouldn’t even be discussed, because it can’t and will never happen. Tarantino wouldent allow it and it wouldnt have an audience
[quote=“Clinton Morgan”]
On the “remakes suck” front where does everyone stand on Brian DePalma’s ‘Scarface’, David Cronenberg’s ‘The Fly’ and Martin Scorsese’s ‘Cape Fear’?
[/quote]
Oh. I didnt know that The Fly was a remake. I have to see the original then, but I did know that Scarface and Cape Fear were remakes. I have both versions of them on dvd
[quote=“thecrazy88”]
some movies just dont need a number 2.
[/quote]
Remakes will almost eternally suck because they only remake the good ones. Even though it made money, there will never be a remake of “Big Momma’s House” or “Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo” because, sure, it will have been popular 20 years ago but word of mouth has spread and now we now “it sucks balls”.
The only way a remake can succeed is when there is some serious passion behind it. Peter Jackson is a great filmmaker and loved the hell out of the original “King Kong” and fought like hell to make it a great companion piece and he did. Same thing that John Carpenter did with “The Thing” and Zack Snyder and James Gunn did with “Dawn of the Dead”.
“The Fly”, although I love it dearly, isn’t quite the same. It wasn’t that well done the first time around. Just campy as hell. So really that was an easy remake. But most of the time they just remake the greats and that is why there is very rarely a great remake.
I also really liked the “Bad News Bears” remake (which I’m gonna be in the minority I’m sure). Billy Bob Thornton was the perfect suitor of the Walter Matthau part and Richard Linklater simply has an inability to make a bad movie. The only thing I didn’t like was the Simple Plan song at the end credits (Simple Plan are so untalented by all means, if they just ran around stage screaming “aboot” for two hours I’d give 'em bigger credit than I do now).
[quote=“Clinton Morgan”]
Has anybody seen ‘Plump Fiction’ with butch lesbian comedienne Lea De Laria (I think that’s how you spell her name) in the Uma Thurman role?
[/quote]
Yeah, I’ve seen that. But I was surprised at how much it wasn’t a laugh-out-loud funny spoof of Tarantino films, but really a collection of spoof characters based on the ones in his films, in surprisingly serious and relatively unfunny situations. But it wasn’t too bad. It was fun for fans of Pulp Fiction and Tarantino’s other films.
One thing though, films like Pulp Fiction don’t get remade. You just don’t remake ground-breaking independent films which defined a decade. I just don’t think it would work and I don’t see what could be done differently to improve on it or make it more accessible nowadays. Last time I checked, enthusiasm for the film hasn’t waned in the slightest.
[quote=“Sharon_Nash”]
Hey, everyone! What do u think about possible remake of PF or maybe somekinda second part?
[/quote]
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
You couldn’t do a direct remake either; it’d have to be exactly the same frame by frame because PF is such a complex film due to its unique story and memorable dialogue. It’s not a film like King Kong where you just have a giant ape who gets captured and then terrorizes New York or The Fly where you have some random dude turning into a fly. Nobody would have the balls to “remake” Pulp because of all the backlash it’d receive upon release and because it’d just be nearly impossible anyway.
Why the hell dosent someone close this thread? there is absolutely no reason to discuss this any more. A pulp remake will never hapen
A remake of Pulp Fiction is like making a fuckin’ “Koran: Part II” or “Torah Reloaded”. It’s a sacrilege to something pure and perfect. Bullshit.
We need another Pulp Fiction movie like we need another Halloween or Friday the 13th Movie.
NO!!! this would make my sad happen! 
>:( 
lol
The day a pulp remake happens, im gonna blow out my brains and sell them on ebay