Rebooting Good Movies


I was watching Pet Sematary last night when I saw Lilja's Library post news that the reboot was underway again.  I saw the Carrie reboot last week, and liked it a lot.  Variety notes that the original was a hit, bringing in $57 million on only a $11 million budget!  So  my reaction to a reboot is a simple "why?"

Unlike Carrie, which was pretty rooted in the 70's -- Pet Sematary holds up today.

Shortlist.com suggests that the reason the film is being remade is because  the original didn't "capitalize" on their own great idea.  They then dig up the used suggestion that they aren't remaking the movie, but going back to the book.  Now we heard this with Carrie.  I liked Carrie, it was most certainly a remake of DePalma's film -- not a return tot he book.  The ending alone was a play on the original that had nothing to do with the book.  It was an update of DePalma's film, not a return to the world of Stephen King.

Also, in the new Carrie film we had Margaret White crucified with household objects.  Did this idea come from DePalma or King?  Well, give Carrie a quick read and you'll discover that indeed a DePalma remake was in the works, not a return to Stephen King's CARRIE.  From wikipedia:
"Carrie returns home and confronts a crazed Margaret, who claims she conceived Carrie due to marital rape. When Margaret stabs Carrie, she kills her mother by telekinetically stopping her heart."
Now is that what happened in the recent "more faithful" adaptation of Carrie?  No!  They went with the more dramatic DePalma ending.  Which is fine, but why pretend it was a return to the book when it was clearly not?

So, I have this feeling -- where we go again.  Same jabber offered up for another remake, which is this time truly unnecessary.

The other reason offered for remaking Pet Sematary is that it wasn't very scary.  I guess that's a matter of taste.  I thought it was dark, creepy, faithful to the book and scary.

What's the real reason for all the remakes?  Fear of trying new things.  Investors don't want to put money into a risky new project, but would rather try and resell things they've already done.  It's like Van Gogh trying to repaint Starry Night.

If money is being poured in Stephen King projects, why doesn't someone take on Duma Key, Rose Madder or From a Buick 8.  And if we just have to remake Stephen King films, how about making a real adaptation of Needful Things.  Now there's a book that would make a good mini-series.

And, how about this; instead of giving us another movie version of Pet Sematary, give us the book on audio.  How about that.

12 comments:

  1. Thanks for the observations that parallel my own, starting from the time I heard someone was doing ANOTHER Carrie remake. Ug. Indeed, it is fear of new things that is driving this, but I believe it is a self defeating trend. Hong Kong horror kicks Hollywood's ass all over the silver screen precisely because they aren't afraid of trying new things.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For all those that want a faithful-to-the-book adaptation of Carrie look no further that the made-for-TV movie. That one was very faithful to the book but pales in comparison to the DePalma version - why? Because DePalma is a great director and he changed what needed to be changed for cinematic purposes. Being "faithful to the book" does not always mean better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Faithful-to-the-book"?!? Carrie lives at the end! It incorporates more of the novel than the '76 version did, but that does not equate to faithfulness.

      That said, I do agree that sticking to the source material automatically equals "better." It's all about what works for the movie and what doesn't.

      As for "Pet Sematary," I'm all for a good version. Maybe this one will have good lead actors and won't feel like it cost about $19.19 to film.

      Delete
    2. I was simply pointing out that what they SAID they were doing was an adaptation of the book, but what they were really doing was a remake of the movie. Sony thinks fans can't figure it out.

      Delete
    3. It's a really odd situation, isn't it? I mean, not only IS is a remake of the DePalma film, it's SO MUCH so that the writer of the '76 film's screenplay (Lawrence Cohen) received a credit on the '13 film!

      I'm with you. I followed the project pretty closely, and everyone all along said they were returning to the novel moreso than they were remaking the first movie. Well, that ended up being a flat-out lie.

      I still liked most of the movie, though. If it had had a less lame ending, I might have loved it.

      Delete
    4. I'm always happy happy when Bryant agrees with me.

      Delete
  3. If its another version of Pet Sematary some may look for, there's a pretty good BBC Radio adaptation that's still available, I think.

    As to Carrie, after thinking over the ending a bit more, a kind of horrible thought occurred to me.

    I remembered a line from the director, I think say the film was "A Superhero Origin story".

    Thinking about those words with the ending gave me a real sinking feeling, and now I wonder if we can expect a sequel any time soon.

    If so, my only conclusion would be, so...you're basically trying to reboot the cancelled Heroes tv series without using the name?

    let's hope that's not what all this was about.

    ChrisC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you seen the box-office? There ain't gonna be a sequel, I promise.

      Peirce did indeed say during a number of interviews that Carrie's story was comparable to a superhero origin story. She has a point. And if the movie had decided to capitalize on that in some way, I'd have been okay with it. Although really, the only way to go would be to make it a superVILLAIN origin story. After all, Carrie is a mass murderer, so calling her a hero is maybe not the best idea. She'd be capable of being reformed; but there would have to be a process there.

      In any case, none of it is actually in the movie. The ending really doesn't have much of anything to say at all, in fact.

      Delete
  4. yeah, there's no sequel coming for Carrie. They were saying stuff like that to throw people off.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm actually a bit more optimistic about the big screen IT that they've been talking about than I am about Pet Sematery.

    I think they cut some of the more "bookish" scenes from Carrie. They've got a lot of names on the IMDB page (I don't know how accurate it is, though) that seemed to be from book related scenes (ie little Carrie and Estelle - you can even buy Estelle's set worn costume on Ebay).
    I don't think they were seriously considering a sequal - after The Rage Carrie II I think they'll probably steer clear of one.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Totally agree. IT actually need a remake!

    ReplyDelete
  7. What the hell happened with Carrie? They promised it would be closer to the book. As proof of their intentions they even released a teaser with Carrie destroying the town. And then it turns out that this part isn't in the film and it doesn't go back to the book at all???

    I have a feeling the movie got delayed for filming extra shots, because the studio didn't like it and wanted it to be closer to the DePalma film.

    ReplyDelete