tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264186707416192943.post7240568800534008226..comments2024-01-27T11:39:55.053-08:00Comments on <a href="http://www.missflickchick.com">miss flickchick</a>: Last remake on the left.miss flickchickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16494437096298634254noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264186707416192943.post-81119467496652046572009-03-13T17:37:00.000-07:002009-03-13T17:37:00.000-07:00Wicker Man — my nominee for worst of the worst, re...<I>Wicker Man</I> — my nominee for worst of the worst, remakes division!miss flickchickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16494437096298634254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264186707416192943.post-54256006039740895782009-03-13T00:48:00.000-07:002009-03-13T00:48:00.000-07:00Good to great remakes:The RingThe FlyThe ThingInva...Good to great remakes:<BR/><I>The Ring</I><BR/><I>The Fly</I><BR/><I>The Thing</I><BR/><I>Invasion of the Body Snatchers</I><BR/><BR/>Not just bad, but evil remakes...<BR/><BR/><I>The Hitcher</I><BR/><I>The Wicker Man</I><BR/><I>Halloween</I><BR/><I>Black Christmas</I><BR/><I>House of Wax</I><BR/><I>The Fog</I><BR/><I>Psycho</I><BR/><I>The Hills Have Eyes</I><BR/><BR/>So while it can be done, it's not likely to meet or surpass the original. That's such a rarity.<BR/><BR/>As for Zombie, well, for me, grimy cinematography and ripped flesh is no substitute for truly disturbing the psyche.achyfakeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15989627337802646906noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264186707416192943.post-69089286419218192212009-03-11T11:30:00.000-07:002009-03-11T11:30:00.000-07:00I can't say I disagree. Like the Dawn of the Dead ...I can't say I disagree. Like the <I>Dawn of the Dead</I> remake, it wasn't <I>bad</I>: Rob Zombie really knows and loves the horror genre, and I think <A HREF="http://www.missflickchick.com/horror.html#devilsrejects" REL="nofollow"><I>The Devil's Rejects</I></A> is the greatest 1975 horror film ever made in 2005.<BR/><BR/>It was simply totally, utterly unnecessary. <BR/><BR/>And like you, I felt compelled to see it... I couldn't even tell you why. I saw the original <I>Halloween</I> the day it opened (and went back to my Manhattan apartment as spooked as anyone with a scary cellar or a back door no one ever remembered to lock), so it wasn't that I specifically needed a <I>Halloween</I> theatrical experience. <BR/><BR/>Maybe it's that I know in my gut that the future of horror is VOD/direct to DVD and some part of me figures I should savor the theatrical experience, no matter how depressing and debased, while I can. <BR/><BR/>Even when the movie is a remake of something I saw under the best (which is often to say the worst) conditions possible: In a scary pit of a theater wreathed in pot smoke, withthe house lights perpetually half on and filled with people who had nothing in common except the desire to see <I>Last House on Dead End Street</I> or <I>House of Psychotic Women</I>.miss flickchickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16494437096298634254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5264186707416192943.post-84706241719747506902009-03-10T21:59:00.000-07:002009-03-10T21:59:00.000-07:00You left out one remake which I am so mad I actual...You left out one remake which I am so mad I actually went to see: Halloween. How completely unnecessary was that film? You don't need to explain WHY Michael is what he is. He's scarier that as a kid he just flipped and killed his sister. I don't buy into the whole broken home/bullied kid which is essentially just a cliche. I can only think my lapse in judgment was due to either wanting to see Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis (casting idea I liked although Donald Pleasance owned that role) or getting the chance to sit in a theater and hear the Halloween theme on the speakers.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08844930213130105581noreply@blogger.com