Gaslight is my "exception that proves the rule" re remakes. Opinions differ on this one. I was so comfortable with the idea that remakes are always inferior that Cukor's remake took me by surprise. the original has Anton Walbrook, and that is no small thing, but after numerous viewings I've arrived at the conclusion that the 1944 adaptation is superior in every way: tighter, more compelling, and more suspenseful. anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
sorry to hear you've been mired in stuff, glad the decks are clearing, looking forward to seeing more of you, in a regularly irregular sort of way...
Meanwhile, movies. I fear that it's banal to bring up "His Girl Friday" in a discussion of remakes because it's a) obvious and b) maybe not a remake? (Is there a category known as "re-thinking the material"?) Film Twitter and various podcasts have taught me to be humble when it comes to films; I don't feel I know enough to come charging in with opinions. So, not a rhetorical question: Does anyone argue that the original Front Page is better than His Girl Friday?
Also not a rhetorical question: Is the original A Star is Born better than the second? It's been a long time since I've seen it, and it's simply not as imprinted on me as the Garland version.
But, of course, I am missing Huston's more important point, which is that it's the misfires that deserve a second chance, and the marketplace just doesn't respect that.
Apologies but this is some of my favorite movie rant-fuel. Despite my efforts, it's going to be long...
My longstanding take on remakes is that they are fine -- as long as the filmmaker has a reason for making another film beyond adding color, grabbing a younger audience, wooing execs with the allure of old IP, etc. This applies even to stories that have been remade so often we don't even call them remakes -- new versions of Shakespeare, Dickens, and Little Women. (I like all of the versions I've seen of my mom's favorite book. I guess all the directors had good reasons.)
But, yeah, I have to put myself in the best company and agree with both the Siren and Mr. Huston. Taking a property that has yet to be handled well is probably the best reason for a remake. I personally hope someone takes a whack quickly at James Ellroy's "The Black Dahlia" which was fouled up beyond all recognition when DePalma tried it. After so many versions, I would also put"The Great Gatsby" atop the list. I've seen all of them and no one's cracked that nut. They can start a new one tomorrow and I won't complain.
A lot of remakes could have been the kind of great rethinks discussed above but are just missed opportunities. My most hated is a legendary flop based on a film I love, the 2006 remake of "The Wicker Man."
As much as the first version is top 10 or 20 material for me, there were -- and still very much are -- legitimate reasons to reset that story in the present in the religiously obsessed USA. Neil LaBute carefully ignored all of them.
Instead, it feels like he said, "Religion is soooo 1974," painstakingly removing everything compelling about the characters in the original, including their primary motivation. He took the rock-ribbed religious conservative Sgt. Howie and the charming but no less determined Lord Summerisle and made them a bee-fearing Nick Cage and a radical feminist new ager with a yen for entomology and obvious metaphors. I imagine LaBute saying "You say my movies are misogynist....I'll show you misogynist....bwahahaha!"
LaBute might also have noticed that the original was arguably as much of a musical as Fosse's "Cabaret." He could have set it on an island in the Gulf Coast and brought in someone like T-Bone Burnett, Taj Mahal, Ry Cooder, Bill Withers, or maybe all of them, to write and orchestrate the kind of songs pagan Americans living on a remote Southern island might have come up with. Sadly, I was not consulted on this point and LaBute chose an island in Puget Sound, which is breathtaking beautiful but if it has a musical heritage of any sort, LaBute didn't bother.
So we've mention The Front Page, Gaslight and A Star Is Born...how do we feel about Imitation Of Life? And do we think of Rio Bravo/El Dorado/Rio Lobo as remakes or rethinking/reimagining?
Gaslight is my "exception that proves the rule" re remakes. Opinions differ on this one. I was so comfortable with the idea that remakes are always inferior that Cukor's remake took me by surprise. the original has Anton Walbrook, and that is no small thing, but after numerous viewings I've arrived at the conclusion that the 1944 adaptation is superior in every way: tighter, more compelling, and more suspenseful. anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
sorry to hear you've been mired in stuff, glad the decks are clearing, looking forward to seeing more of you, in a regularly irregular sort of way...
I'm so sorry about the "stuff."
Meanwhile, movies. I fear that it's banal to bring up "His Girl Friday" in a discussion of remakes because it's a) obvious and b) maybe not a remake? (Is there a category known as "re-thinking the material"?) Film Twitter and various podcasts have taught me to be humble when it comes to films; I don't feel I know enough to come charging in with opinions. So, not a rhetorical question: Does anyone argue that the original Front Page is better than His Girl Friday?
Also not a rhetorical question: Is the original A Star is Born better than the second? It's been a long time since I've seen it, and it's simply not as imprinted on me as the Garland version.
But, of course, I am missing Huston's more important point, which is that it's the misfires that deserve a second chance, and the marketplace just doesn't respect that.
Would that all substackers were so judicious. Thank you, SSS.
Dammit, Siren! You'll take my money and you'll like it!
Apologies but this is some of my favorite movie rant-fuel. Despite my efforts, it's going to be long...
My longstanding take on remakes is that they are fine -- as long as the filmmaker has a reason for making another film beyond adding color, grabbing a younger audience, wooing execs with the allure of old IP, etc. This applies even to stories that have been remade so often we don't even call them remakes -- new versions of Shakespeare, Dickens, and Little Women. (I like all of the versions I've seen of my mom's favorite book. I guess all the directors had good reasons.)
But, yeah, I have to put myself in the best company and agree with both the Siren and Mr. Huston. Taking a property that has yet to be handled well is probably the best reason for a remake. I personally hope someone takes a whack quickly at James Ellroy's "The Black Dahlia" which was fouled up beyond all recognition when DePalma tried it. After so many versions, I would also put"The Great Gatsby" atop the list. I've seen all of them and no one's cracked that nut. They can start a new one tomorrow and I won't complain.
A lot of remakes could have been the kind of great rethinks discussed above but are just missed opportunities. My most hated is a legendary flop based on a film I love, the 2006 remake of "The Wicker Man."
As much as the first version is top 10 or 20 material for me, there were -- and still very much are -- legitimate reasons to reset that story in the present in the religiously obsessed USA. Neil LaBute carefully ignored all of them.
Instead, it feels like he said, "Religion is soooo 1974," painstakingly removing everything compelling about the characters in the original, including their primary motivation. He took the rock-ribbed religious conservative Sgt. Howie and the charming but no less determined Lord Summerisle and made them a bee-fearing Nick Cage and a radical feminist new ager with a yen for entomology and obvious metaphors. I imagine LaBute saying "You say my movies are misogynist....I'll show you misogynist....bwahahaha!"
LaBute might also have noticed that the original was arguably as much of a musical as Fosse's "Cabaret." He could have set it on an island in the Gulf Coast and brought in someone like T-Bone Burnett, Taj Mahal, Ry Cooder, Bill Withers, or maybe all of them, to write and orchestrate the kind of songs pagan Americans living on a remote Southern island might have come up with. Sadly, I was not consulted on this point and LaBute chose an island in Puget Sound, which is breathtaking beautiful but if it has a musical heritage of any sort, LaBute didn't bother.
I could go on!!
I hope the unpleasant stuff recedes quickly!
Every time I hear "remake" "Casablanca" in the same sentence I want to throw things.
So timely!! Lots of discussion (on Twitter and Bluesky) about the remake (and I was in some of it - and even mentioned NIGHTMARE ALLEY )
Great post. Now I'm going to have to read that biography.
So sorry about all the "stuff". Internet strangers miss you and are thinking of you.
So we've mention The Front Page, Gaslight and A Star Is Born...how do we feel about Imitation Of Life? And do we think of Rio Bravo/El Dorado/Rio Lobo as remakes or rethinking/reimagining?