Times when the remake/reboot was better than the original

>>83548713
That ending at the fountain is the ultimate man-kino.

>>83548664
>>83548713
and we are done
/thread

>>83548664
I would have liked to have seen more of the blonde girl nude

>>83548896
Saw this 3 times in theaters. good shit

>>83548896
I've been watching this about every six months without fail, why? please why what is it?

310 to Yuma
the fly
the thing

File: true grit.jpg (140KB, 634x900px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 634x900px

>>83548949
the little girl is sexy

>>83548997
nope not it pedo, I like the coens but not this much something about this film

>>83548997
looks better with one arm

File: self.jpg (179KB, 1200x1430px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1200x1430px

>>83548997

>>83548949
You needed your Jeff Bridges fix. I'm exactly like you.

>>83549111
I think that might be it

File: hell or.jpg (297KB, 656x970px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 656x970px

>>83549131
seen this yet? Really good

File: ol'bridgy.jpg (56KB, 560x375px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 560x375px

>>83549111
>>83549131
then why not watch this modern masterpiece?

>>83549169
been meaning to get to it I have it, will watch now
>>83549184
I watched that in the cinema in 3d on really good acid, and a freind freaked out and we left about 1/2 way through, good times

File: yodo.jpg (106KB, 496x372px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 496x372px

which one was better?

>>83549216
yojimbo always, fist full is great though
yojimbo vs zatoichi best

>>83548896
Didn't see the original, but this was pretty dreadful.

>>83549216
Dollars. I find Kurosawa to be very overrated.

>>83549237
seriously opinion discarded, damn you suck

File: Red Harvest.jpg (43KB, 324x499px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 324x499px

>>83549216
The book.

File: mit.jpg (12KB, 216x320px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 216x320px

this imo

magnificent 7 (the 1960 one) is more enjoyable then 7 samurai

>>83549396
yes, and I always like kirosawa but yea magnificent 7 is better then 7 samurai

>>83548664
The Thing

>>83549711
If it used practical effects I probably would have liked it better than the original.

>>83549765
what? The thing is a remake of the thing from another world and did use practical effects

>>83549210
>>83549169
for a movie where basically nothing happens it's great

>>83549254
>>83549237
>>83549216
isn't the acting shitty in those old japan movies? like in jacki chan movies

>>83549711
>No based Kurt
>CGI fest
>Better

3/10 made me reply

>>83549813
I really like movies where nothing happens, ok i really need to watch this

>>83549817
no, its Mifune its kirosawa its about as close to perfect film making as you get, for fucks sake, i'm drunk and tired so I'm not getting into it but fuck,
>>83549396
7 samurai is awesome too I just watched a bunch of comparison stuff and I changed my mind I like 7 samurai better

>>83549829
wtf are you talking about? The 80's movie the thing is the remake!

>>83549829
you um you dumb, yes the kurt russel one is better

>>83549711
in no way shape or form

Old Boy

>>83550534
>>83550597
b8

File: who goes there.jpg (101KB, 685x1000px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 685x1000px

>>83549711
that's not a remake, it's another adaptation of the book Who Goes There.

the only thing it shares with the 1950s version is the intro title effect that Carpenter's a fan of.

>>83551146
>that's not a remake, it's another adaptation of the book Who Goes There.
hmm

>>83549893
are you retarded?????

>>83551254
no its you, this is remakes better then the OG The Thing by carpenter is better then the 50s one, not even him your just really retarded

>>83548664
>pic unrelated.jpg

>>83551222
yes, you call those adaptations, the 1950s movie is about a big frankenstein monster-looking vegetable guy attacking people instead of a shapeshifting creature who can assimilate organisms and pose as them. it's less accurate to the source material than the disney pocahontas.

>>83551417
sly fgt

>>83551423
ok whatever, its all the same thing in the end its a rehash of something already done, call it whatever you like, john carpenters one is still better

>>83548664
The Producers comes to mind.
Also Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. And I agree with Dredd.

>>83551423
I don't know what a remake is if not a movie based on the same source material as a previous movie. Of course there are differences in how the material is adapted to the film, that doesn't disqualify it as a remake. I would say it's the very reason remakes exist.

>>83551543
>>83548664
Oh, and I guess if we're going the capeshit route then I like 1989's Batman more than the Adam West one, if that counts.

>>83551351
what????

>>83551575
huh?????

>>83551543
>Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
>remake of Marlon Brando film
I did not know this.

>>83551573
>capeshit
>dredd
your just really fucking salty about this movie eh? why anon?

>>83551551
>I don't know what a remake is if not a movie based on the same source material as a previous movie
A movie remake is something that takes the previous movie as source material and adapts it to ''contemporary standards''. John Carpenter's The Thing did not take the previous movie as source material. Ergo it's not a remake, just another adaptation.

You're basically saying any greek mythology movie today must be a remake of Jason and the Argonauts because hey, they're both from the same source material.

>>83551624
Capeshit refers to anything related to hero comic books, good or bad. That's why people call Logan capeshit despite praising it.

Scarface (TM)
Way superior than it's 1930's counterpart

>>83551664
>A movie remake is something that takes the previous movie as source material and adapts it to ''contemporary standards''.
I guess we have a different understanding of the word then. I have always seen remakes as movies pulling from the same material as a movie that came out previously, not as movies that use the previous film as source material.

>>83551664
you are really hung up on what defines a remake, please take a deep breath take a whole bunch sit down or maybe stand up and take a walk, you need to stop being so autistic ok?

>>83551693
you still need to come to terms with your high sodium levels, why do you dislike Dredd?

>>83551664
Different anon but I'd also call a second film based on the same story a remake.
I guess to be technical we'd call it a readaptation (or something similar), but that word isn't really part of film-studies or filmmaking terminology.
I think for the purposes of this thread it's reasonable for him to say that both The Thing films are based on the same story and therefore reasonable for him to say that he liked one more than the other.
Should the word "readaptation" start being used on /tv/? If not, what substitute could we use?

>>83551624
If it's based on a comic, it's capeshit. Doesn't stop it from being an awesome movie.

>>83551693
capeshit is NOT related to anything from comics, Dredd is an action movie, not capeshit

>>83551751
That wasn't the anon who referred to Dredd as capeshit; I was. And I don't dislike it. I think it's the second-best capeshit film ever, second only to 1978's Superman. I think it's an excellent film.
All I've said about it is that it's better than Judge Dredd. Don't know what would make you think I disliked it. Is it my use of the word "capeshit"?
That's a genre, not a rating.

>>83551799
>its better then judge dredd
ok then i'll stop being butthurt, remakeanon will stop being so autistic, and if you could please stop referring to really anything dredd related as 'capeshit' see >>83551785 we can all get along

>>83551799
>That's a genre, not a rating.
>literally contains the word shit
hmm

>>83551860
I don't really see how Dredd isn't capeshit. He's got mechanical organs and limbs (depending on the version), has a motorcycle not at all indifferent from the batmobile, and was in a serialised strip where he'd take out bad guys each week.
He also had crossovers with Batman (not to mention Alien and Predator).
Have you actually read any of his stuff or are you just saying the film isn't capeshit because you liked it?

>>83551905
On this board, capeshit has never meant 0/10. It's just a catch-all phrase for superhero crap, regardless of its quality. "capekino" is a much more recent development.

>>83551715
That's the definition of remake, otherwise, as I said, every greek mythology movie today would be a remake of Jason of the Argonauts because it's based on the same source material. Every sequel to a remake would also be called a remake according to your definition even if it shares zero similarities to the original source anymore.
>>83551720
>pointing out that something isn't a remake means you're autistic
>>83551769
>Different anon but I'd also call a second film based on the same story a remake.
But the original movie isn't being ''remade'', it's being tossed aside. Something like the new Total Recall is a remake because it does take the original movie as source material and remakes it.

>>83551785
>>83551751
It's capeshit whether you like it or not.

>>83551965
its not a catch-all-phrase at all that what your missing it defines the current wave of trash that we've had for about 8 years now, kids aside that what it actually refers to, e.g. the invisible man with Chevy chase is capeshit by your definition

>>83551965
>On this board, capeshit has never meant 0/10. It's just a catch-all phrase for superhero crap, regardless of its quality.
I have to disagree. Obviously not 0/10 but I have always considered "capeshit" to be a term for all the soulless blockbuster superhero movies that keep coming and keep making money. It's doesn't just refer to the genre but implies a certain attitude in its development, huge companies making shitty entertainment that will appeal to masses. Movies made purely because they're projected to make money. Movies where no one actually cares about the end product or even tries to make any statements, just trying to finish something that lasts 90 minutes and will make money thanks to marketing.

>>83552028
as I said, u really hung up on the word 'remake' get over it

>>83552028
>Something like the new Total Recall is a remake because it does take the original movie as source material and remakes it.
Well, hang on, in neither the 2012 version or the original story is it set on Mars, but in the 1990 film it is. Wouldn't the 2012 version be drawing more from the original story than the 1990 version?
Anyway, my point is that at this stage there doesn't seem to be a better term for this particular phenomenon. We can either coin a new term for it or refer to it as a remake. I don't think that either option is particularly wrong at this stage.

>>83552028
Every mythology movie is kind of a remake though.
> Every sequel to a remake would also be called a remake according to your definition even if it shares zero similarities to the original source anymore.
Most of the times sequels use another book from the series as their source material rather than the first book. Or they use a completely new script that only has the character in common. You know this, you're not autistic.

>>83552078
are you this dense? is not capeshit you fucking retard, is an action movie

>>83552083
>>83552081
Regardless of your opinion of it, capeshit has always been used to refer to comic book movies, including praised ones like Logan.

It's like thinking that the extremely common -fag suffix always means something negative even when it's often used neutrally or even positively like ''oldfag''.

>>83552081
>e.g. the invisible man with Chevy chase is capeshit by your definition
Well, that's not based on a comic book, nor does it feature a superhero, so I'm not really sure what definition you think I'm going by.

>>83552083
Right, and it's exactly this kind of conversation which led to threads like "What's TDK then? Is that capeshit?" and then the "capekino" meme was born to refer to capeshit that was of a higher quality. It's far too late for me to stop saying capeshit, but I haven't yet been able to bring myself to start saying capekino.

>>83552145
>It's like thinking that the extremely common -fag suffix always means something negative even when it's often used neutrally or even positively like ''oldfag''.
Yeah, that's a pretty decent analogy for it.

>>83552180
yes it does, the invisible man was a comic strip and a full blown comic before the film e.g. capeshit

File: total recall.jpg (252KB, 1448x908px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 1448x908px

>>83548664
One of the best cyberpunk movie ever make

>>83548664
does it really count as a remake or reboot when it's just another adaptation of something that's older than you

>>83552120
There doesn't need to be a new term, it's what it's always been: adaptation. Every greek mythology movie is an adaptation, some like the 2010 Clash of the Titans double as a remake because they are remaking a previous movie.
>>83552124
>kind of a remake
No, just an adaptation of the source material, which isn't a movie (most of the time).
>Most of the times sequels use another book from the series as their source material rather than the first book
We're talking sequels to movie remakes, which are usually original stories. I'm not talking about sequels to regular adaptations that aren't remakes.

>>83552214
No, Chevy Chase's film, which was called Memoirs of an Invisible Man, is based on a novel.

An unrelated character called The Invisible Man also began in another novel written by H.G. Wells (a hundred years earlier, believe it or not), and this character was eventually adapted for comic-strips once it reached the public domain.

>>83552140
see
>>83552145

>>83552260
Okay, so if anon wants to discuss multiple adaptations of various stories across multiple media, how would he go about creating the thread? Writing an essay to explain what he means and what he feels is eligible?

>>83552275
sure and thats what not only inspired its what it was entirely based off, by your definition it is cape shit

>>83552303
but thats completely wrong

>>83552314
>Okay, so if anon wants to discuss multiple adaptations of various stories across multiple media, how would he go about creating the thread?
You mean ''let's talk about movies based on x''?

>>83552260
>We're talking sequels to movie remakes, which are usually original stories. I'm not talking about sequels to regular adaptations that aren't remakes.
Please I ask you to re-read this quote than ask yourself, am I making this more difficult than it has to be?

>>83552303
I don't care what this guy put there, Dredd is not capeshit, capeshit is everything made by marvel and DC as a product to make money, if you don't like Dredd go fuck yourself and stop saying nonsense

>>83552355
well shit I can't refute this amazing post. I concede.

>>83552360
That'd work for one very specific example, but this anon began the thread to talk about multiple stories, not just the one.

He said "Times when the remake/reboot was better than the original".
Maybe "Times when later adaptations were better than the original"?

>>83552383
cool

>>83552362
What don't you understand?

Sequel to remake = Wrath of the Titans

Sequel to adaptation = Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Sequels to adaptations tend to be adaptations themselves like the example above. Sequels to standalone movie remakes on the other hand tend to be original stories (''original'' with the biggest quotation marks possible).

>>83552333
It's not, though. My definition of capeshit (and the definition that was until this thread, I believe, the pretty well-accepted definition on /tv/) is any film featuring a superhero and/or based upon a comic-book.

Wells wrote a book in 1987.
In 1955, Wells' character was used in a comic-strip.
Saint, inspired by Wells, wrote a book in 1987.
In 1992, Chevy Chase did a film based on Saint's book.
In 1999, Alan Moore used Wells' character in his comic-strip.

Do you see why Chase's character was not based upon a comic-book character, now? He didn't begin in a comic-strip - that was a later adaptation.
Comics have also been made for Aliens, Predators, Buffy, and Angel. Alien: Covenant is not based on a comic-book, though, because Alien did not begin as a comic-book.

>>83552379
>Dredd is a good movie, "capeshit" doesn't necessarily imply that it's a bad movie.
>i don't care what you wrote, you just don't like Dredd

>>83552556
so the comic has to come before anything else? cause almost everything has a comic attached these days, so does that make everything capeshit? or is it only things that first appeared as drawn?

File: bear-beer-300x241.jpg (16KB, 300x241px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x241px

>>83552582
nigga you don't understand

>>83552593
No, it's not a chronological thing, it's about from where the story was adapted.

If you wrote a book, and then another anon turned it into a comic-series, and then without reading that comic series I turned your book into a film, then that film wouldn't be based upon the other anon's comic series, would it?

But if you wrote a book, and then another anon turned it into a comic-series, and then I read that comic-series, loved it, and turned it into a film without ever reading your book, then it would be based upon the series and not the book.

Two entirely separate men (Alan Moore and Saint), without any involvement with each other, were inspired by the same piece of work and created new works around it. These new works, though, had nothing to do with each other but for the fact that they were based on the same original material.

It's also worth mentioning that (to my knowledge), Saint has never admitted or acknowledged that his work was derived from Wells'. Probably was, though.

>>83552677
No, you don't seem to understand. Literally nobody in this thread has said that they don't like Dredd, and at least two anons have definitively stated that they do like it, but you still seem to be certain that they dislike it.

>>83552768
think that was a joke post after he realized his mistake, that phrase in particular is always used non-seriously.

>>83552145
>capeshit has always been used to refer to comic book movies
No it hasn't, it's only been in use since the fatigue set in over the constant comic-book movies.

>>83552739
in the words of another anon
nigga you don't understand

>>83552852
Different anon but I'm pretty sure he means capeshit has meant the same thing for as long as it's been used.

>>83552852
You seem to think that I said ''capeshit has existed as long as comic book movies'' and not ''since capeshit was invented, it has been used to refer to comic book movies as a whole''

>>83552768
no, YOU don't understand what I'm trying to say

>>83552878
Ah, I stand corrected.

File: the blob.gif (1MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x281px

The Blob

>>83552218
yeah, the original was.

>>83552944
I dunno man, it's certainly a better spectacle for the eyes but I'd say the original has more likable characters.

File: dredd christmas.jpg (446KB, 1280x893px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 1280x893px

>>83552078
Judge Dredd is not a superhero comic you plebeian. It's dystopian scifi satire.

>>83553034
Sounds like Watchmen.

>>83553034
>motorcycle loaded with weapons
>gun loaded with settings
>artificial augmented organs
>crossovers with Batman
>fights the bad guys in a cool costume

>>83553143
>crossover with batman

shit, so Predator is capeshit too

what a fucking dense

>>83553168
How would you define a superhero comic, anon?

>>83553034
If Dredd isn't capeshit then neither is Daredevil, Captain America or Batman.

>>83553211
Yeah, if superpowers determine whether a character is a superhero then Dredd is even more capeshit than Batman because he's technologically enhanced.
He also acts within the parameters of the law. Just saying.

>>83553204
nah I'm just tired, you win, Dredd is capeshit, who cares

>>83550597
I mean...Olsens definitely hotter than the gook chick from the original but besides that.

>>83552218
Is this fun? I really like colin farrell but I just heard so many bad things about it I didn't bother then forgot about it.

>>83553598
>Is this fun?
no.

>>83553598
its ok, they never go to mars though, forget about mars, no mars

>>83553143
1. There isn't always a bad guy in Judge Dredd stories, frequently the criminals are just unruly citizens or people in the wrong place at the wrong time
2, His uniform is not unique, every judge wears it and they use the same motorcycles
3. There was one crossover with Batman. Batman got arrested.

>>83549711

yes
>>83549796
>>83549829
>>83549910
>>83550534
>>83551146
>>83551222
>>83551254
>>83551423
>>83551575
>>83551588
>>83551664

you guys are uneducated mongrels... get the FUCK out of this board immediatly or stop saying shit.

>>83553798
hmm

>>83553061
>>83553211
>>83553260

kys faggot

>>83553949
rude.

>>83553746
>1. There isn't always a bad guy in Judge Dredd stories, frequently the criminals are just unruly citizens or people in the wrong place at the wrong time
>2, His uniform is not unique, every judge wears it and they use the same motorcycles
>3. There was one crossover with Batman. Batman got arrested.
Points 1 and 2 also apply to Green Lantern.

I do get where you're coming from, I just think that perhaps you've romanticised the character a little because you prefer him to the majority of superhero shit, and I'm with you there. I'm just saying that at its basest level it's the same concept - a serialised strip of a hero saving the day.

Also, there were at least three crossovers with Batman that I'm aware of. In one, the Riddler is a bad guy who pits them against each other. Cool concept, not a great story. In another one (I think the one you're referring to), they team up against the Scarecrow and yeah, Dredd arrests Batman. He lets him go, though.

>>83553949
I don't know if another anon is both of the other posts to which you're replying, but I'm only one of them.

>>83553982
Dredd doesn't always save the day, unless you mean saving it for The Justice Department. He literally incited violence in a democratic movement march so judges could move in and arrest everybody (see America).
I get where you're coming from, but it's just not the same feel or the same world, and you don't have to do the same mental gymnastics (why don't you just kill The Joker? Why don't they just use a sniper on Magneto?). The answer is always Because this is Megacity One, and this is how we're handling it today.

>>83554146
>Dredd doesn't always save the day
You think all comic book heroes are shining examples of morality and virtue or that they always win?

>>83554146
Where do you stand on stuff like The Punisher and Watchmen?
I would still count these antiheroes as part of the superhero genre, myself.

File: 1372127365299.jpg (52KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x480px

>>83552218
>let's take a movie that was loved for its humor and cheesiness, and remake it as dull, humorless and soulless as possible

>>83554054
Fuck man

You made me want to watch Tokyo Drift

>>83548664

Dredd isn't remake or reboot as original isn't the stallone abomination of the movie, but Judge Dredd comics.

>>83548664
Dredd isn't a remake or a reboot

File: maltese falcon 3596923_640px.jpg (135KB, 640x853px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 640x853px

Third time was the charm.

>>83556103
wrong

File: bastards.jpg (888KB, 1241x1894px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 1241x1894px

this original is better than tarantula

>>83557559

Nope. The original is the fucking comics. Stallone film isn't the original, at the best it is parody of the comics.

>>83552944
Oh fuck man, they're doing another remake of this. It's either going to be amazeballs, or total shit.

File: EvilDeadII_quad_UK_Humphreys-1_1024x1024.jpg (246KB, 900x674px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 900x674px

Does this count?