Films where the remake is regarded better than the original.

dawn of the dead

fite me irl if you disagree

>>82304235
I i unironically agree.

File: Oldboy_2013_film_poster.jpg (26KB, 259x400px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 259x400px

>>82304235
strong agree

>>82304235
i agree

>>82304235
True fact.

as much as a "meme" as they are now Gunn can write a solid screenplay and Snyder is a solid visual director.

inb4 plebs who have never seen the original Howard Hawks Thing say The Thing

The Thing

>>82304391
That was more of a prequel though, since it's about the original camp, iirc

>>82304208
Didn't care for the remake. Seemed just a slick duller version of the original.

The original wasn't high art either but the rape scenes are still hard to watch.

>>82304279
My ass, although the two floor corridor fight was pretty dope and brolin was damn good.
The antagonist was fucking pathetic

>>82304391
But you gotta give it to carpenter to making it so much better.
Props to hawk though with the electric floor trap

File: FrightNight2011Poster.jpg (57KB, 290x426px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 290x426px

?

>>82304235
Fuck me harder Steve

>>82305106
Fuck no.

>>82304451
this guy

File: large_tGLO9zw5ZtCeyyEWgbYGgsFxC6i.jpg (103KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 400x600px

Correct answers coming through

File: 1443140909082.gif (2MB, 382x369px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 382x369px

>>82305226
my bad, i didn't even know there was a Thing before Carpenters. I just thought that anon was being retarded.

but it turns out i'm retarded.

File: MV5BOWM1MTgyYjAtZDcwYy00M2Q5LWE1ZGQtNWQ4YTc5ZmRmMjAxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTUyMzE4Mzg@._V1_UX182_CR0,0,182,268_AL_.jpg (18KB, 182x268px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 182x268px

>>82305307

File: MV5BNjI3OGRhYjUtZmY1MC00N2JlLWJjMDUtYmViNTE0NDA0NzZlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTI4MjkwNjA@._V1_UX182_CR0,0,182,268_AL_.jpg (12KB, 182x268px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 182x268px

>>82305307

>>82305307
More like the defarted

File: 1432630812130.jpg (146KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1920x1080px

>>82305743
good one

>>82305307
The only "correct" answers are:
The thing 1982
Scarface 1983
The fly 1986

The rest is you being a subtitle impaired pleb

File: image.jpg (614KB, 1080x1600px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 1080x1600px

Its not even a competition.

File: Lolita1997.jpg (26KB, 370x525px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 370x525px

>>82305814
You can't seriously prefer Kubrick's Lolita to the 97 version.

>>82305832
Not a remake though

>>82305854
t. cunnyposter

>>82304391
The Thing wasn't a remake of that movie though.

>>82305873
I'm a cunnysier but I'm not the cunnyposter

I don't want a hard drive full of little girl pics

>>82305889
Carpenter's version was more faithful to the novel but they did pay homage to the 1950s movie with the title screen sequence.

>>82305354
Dont feel too bad anon. They really are completely diff movies and Carpenters is not a remake.
They are both billed as being adapted from the book Who Goes There. But the Hawkes film has no similarities to the book except "spaceman found in frozen tundra"

>>82305684
yes. so much. The original was a stupid comedy. Jeremy Irons is the best.

>>82305814

Infernal Affairs is gross weeb.

Enjoy the sequels

>>82305814
Only Scarface is a remake. The others two are adaptations from short stories.

>>82306052
This.

>it's a /tv/ doesn't understand what a word means episode

>>82306052
This^

Hawkes
>Alaska
>frozen 7 foot tall plant based alien
>Alien gives no fuck about humans only wants plants
>plant man fried everyone lives

Carpenter
>Antarctica
>Alien with no known visual can take over multiple lifeforms
>Alien gives fuck about humans so it can take them all over
>Everyone dies

>>82305854
Once again, not a remake. It's another adaptation of the novel.

>>82306236
this definition of yours is retarded

it doesn't matter if it's adapted, it's still a remake of the film. the same subject matter is covered.

or we could use your retarded logic and say the films are remakes of the novel, in a visual medium.

>>82306267
No it isn't. A remake means that the original film is the source material like Scarface. In the case of The Thing, there are multiple adaptations of the source material, which is a book.

>>82304208
No one thinks that

>>82306307
A notable exception being Gus Van Sant's Psycho which was a shot-for-shot remake of Hitchcock's adaptation of the book.

>>82306307
anon, it really doesn't matter what the source is. all films start with a screenplay. which is basically an unpublished book to use a terrible analogy.

my point is you're trying to define "remake" as something that doesn't have a source in literature, which is silly.

>>82306377
It's not though. Calling John Carpenter's The Thing a remake of The Thing From Another World like this guy >>82304391 tried to do is very inaccurate. Carpenter's movie was a much more faithful adaptation of the source material.

>>82305814

If you actually think Infernal Affairs is better than The Departed you are a hipster or a HK weeb.

Departed isn't great or whatever, but it sure as shit is better than the shitty mess that is Infernal Affairs.

File: nojustno.gif (1MB, 300x224px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x224px

>>82306419
so by your logic the Disney Beauty and the Beast films are not remakes of the original French film, I'm guessing

>>82306521
No, because they're not. How is this hard to understand?

File: Cape Fear.jpg (7KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x168px

Best remake coming thru

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5798-VRVYA

File: 1430503391140.jpg (143KB, 396x566px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 396x566px

>>82306582
i just don't like your logic in this matter, sorry. i think it's a goofy definition.

GUESS WE JUST GOTTA AGREE TO DISAGREE ANON

>>82306267
>the same subject matter is covered

Nothing is the same except an alien in a frozen wasteland.
If we use your retarded logic than Aliens vs Predator, Alien Hunter, and XFiles movie are also remakes of Hawkes film becuz alien in frozen wasteland.
Please tell me ur not really that stupid

File: onesheet.jpg (73KB, 387x580px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 387x580px

>>82304208
if you disagree you're wrong

File: 16539.jpg (19KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 640x480px

HHHHHHHHHHH

>>82306839
I was talking about Lolita specifically, but my argument applies to anything adapted from a novel.

if they share a source they are remakes, it doesn't matter if the source is a film or a novel. it's all covering the same ground. all you need is one adaptation and then another adaptation of the same thing. boom, remake.

>>82306704
I'm just trying to make a distinction between the two. I wouldn't call that shitty TV miniseries version of The Shining a remake of Kubrick's version, ya know?

>>82306940
well. it is though. with a different format being made for TV.

but it's still a remake, it's the same damn thing remade. why is this so difficult to grasp?

maybe you're thinking of reBOOT which is a little different.

>>82306880
I agree

https://youtu.be/ZY0b8KNAZVg

>>82306980
No, I'm just saying adaptation would be the more correct word to use. Both Kubrick's version and the miniseries are adaptations of Stephen King's original novel. Kubrick's version was a lot more loose with the story as written though.

>>82307081
i'd say they're interchangeable, or more correctly, we seem to be arguing what the intent of the later film's creator is. who is to say 1997 Lolita is not a response to Kubrick's goofy version? likewise who is to say the the 2011 The Thing is not a remake of the 1982 The Thing?

They are both adaptations, AND remakes. Whereas perhaps something like >>82305106
is definitely a remake but not an adaptation, afaik.

Anyway, I still say they are remakes.

>>82306939
But ur argument really doesnt apply to Teh Thing.
Hawkes film is billed as "loosely adapted" from the novella. All he used was an alien found on one of the poles (movie uses north pole). Nothing else.
Carpenters film is "based" on the novella and he uses almost everything from it.

>>82307219
What about the 2011 The Thing then? Is that a remake or not?

>>82307290
Its a prequel to 1982 The Thing that shows the original group that found the spacecraft and dug up the alien. They get buttraped and the thing survives as a dog which is where the 1982 movie picks up.

>>82307409
Yet it copies many of the tropes from that movie. The weird head monster thing, flamethrower. Technically a prequel but in spirit a remake, otherwise it would be called The Thing: Awakening or something.

I feel like I'm just arguing semantics at this point though.

File: ed2013.png (2MB, 1920x804px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x804px

>>82306880
pr was absolute kino and the remake was great gore porn.

>>82307458
>but in spirit a remake
I could sorta buy that.

>The weird head monster thing
The 1982 crew finds the weird head monster inside the remains of the 2011 crew base. The 2011 crew actually find the spacecraft and blow it up which is what the 1982 crew discovers.

Both are not related to hawkes movie tho.

Also, who else saw 1982 The Thing and wondered why they never explored the spaceship? It was mostly intact and they could have landed the chopper on top of it without having to climb down.

>>82306688
>the theater scene was ad-libbed by both.

File: planet.webm (2MB, 1920x816px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x816px

>>82304279
>oldboy remake
>better

>>82306880
While I don't think it's better, it's still bretty good.

File: blub.webm (476KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 640x360px

YOU UTTER PLEBS

>rape is bad xDDD
>people should be tortured for rape XDDDD

File: trugrt.jpg (37KB, 630x540px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 630x540px

FUCKING COME AT ME

>>82307889
god damn that looks like gross-out kino

which blob movie is this, idk how many there are

File: blub2.gif (2MB, 300x160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x160px

>>82308021
blob 1988
absolute kino

>>82308009
GTFO with ur abomination of a film.
Matt Damon can never compare to Glen Campbell!

>>82304208
Hunger Games > Battle Royale

>>82308186
I like the way you think

File: bullshit.jpg (35KB, 490x328px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 490x328px

>>82308250
>>82308186

>>82304235

Where should we meet?

File: the-departed-mark-wahlberg.jpg (62KB, 669x359px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 669x359px

>>82306509
>Departed
.. was the correct answer

>>82306509
>If you actually think Infernal Affairs is better than The Departed
It is, and its a well known fact

>>82304279
Beyond the pale even for bait

>>82304853
What about the revenge scenes? The whole climax of the remake was pretty good I thought.

File: large_gFqZczQsmbLlOydFS3YP3r5sHtK.jpg (74KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 400x600px

ez

>>82304235
I don't even know how people consider this a remake when it's more like a soft reboot that just used the same name. They hardly have anything in common

File: p28801_p_v8_am.jpg (288KB, 960x1440px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 960x1440px

kinda ashamed this wasnt posted