Remakes & Sequels

(https://stephenfollows.com)

Web page subject‑to‑update if my opinions change.

Recycling Old Rope for New Money

Theoretically, the idea of doing remakes and sequels to movies should be perfectly acceptable given that in stage drama such things are deemed acceptable. No‑one complains when a director tackles Hamlet or Oedipus Rex after it has been tackled so many times before – often better.

However, cinema has the problem that movies are rarely well‑written because they are written by mediocre writers and, thus, rarely studied as texts in their own right. Remaking them seems pointless since there is not enough subtlety in the text to find anything more by doing a remake in another way which explores depths that, in fact, rarely exist. The classic texts of theater do not have this problem because they address universal themes, in a universal way that people can understand at any time.

If a movie was done well in the first place, that was probably the best way of doing it and, ultimately, the only way - unless one wants to produce a remake that is inferior. The detail required for movie audiences to suspend disbelief is greater in movies than for any other expressive medium. This gives filmmakers less room for maneuver - in terms of the interpretation of material - so films of identical stores tend to produce identical (or inferior) films, rather more than they do superior ones; making remakes largely pointless, except for technical improvements (color, better SFX, less censorship, etc) that rarely makes the movies so made actually much better.

Although it is hard to make a great movie from a great book, because they are different media and what works in one will not necessarily work in another, it is possible to do a great remake (or sequel), so long as it is not merely to update old material, but to explore it in new ways that offer deeper insights.

Top of page

1. Remakes
1. Better Remakes
2. Good Remakes
2. Sequels
1. Better Sequels
2. Good Sequels
3. Appendixes
1. See Also
2. Notes, Footnotes or References
3. Further Reading
4. External Links

Remakes

Remakes that were better than their originals:

1. 
   (remake of: Death at a Funeral [2007]);
2. 
   (remake of: Fail Safe [1964]);
3. 
   (remake of: The Front Page [1931]);
4. 
   (remake of: The Maltese Falcon [1931] & Satan Met a Lady [1936]);
5. 
   (remake of: Ocean’s 11 [1960]);
6. 
   (remake of: Oldeuboi [2003]);
7. 
   (remake of: Charade [1963 film]).

---

Remakes that were almost as good as their originals:

1. 
   (remake of: Bedazzled []);
2. 
   (remake of: Cat People [1942]);
3. 
   (remake of: Cat People [1942]);
4. 
   (remake of: Dawn of the Dead [1978]);
5. &
   (remakes of: Rio Bravo [1958]);
6. 
   (remake of: Yojimbo [1961]);
7. 
   (remake of: Funny Games [1997]);
8. 
   (remake of: Gambit [1966]);
9. 
   (remake of: Insomnia [1997]);
10. 
    (remake of: Ladykillers [1955]);
11. 
    (remake of: Let the Right One In [2008]).

---

Sequels

Sequels that were better than their originals:

1. 
   (sequel to: Before Sunset [2004]);
2. 
   (sequel to: The Stud [1978]);
3. &
   (sequel to: Barbershop [2002]);
4. 
   (sequel to: Crank [2006]);
5. &
   (sequels to: Dracula [1958] & Brides of Dracula [1960]);
6. 
   (sequel to: Tropa de Elite [2007]);
7. 
   (sequel to: F/X [1986]);
8. 
   (sequel to: Friday [1995] & Next Friday [2000]);
9. 
   (sequel to: Dr. No [1962]);
10. 
    (sequel to: Ipcress File [1965]);
11. 
    (sequel to: Godfather [1972]);
12. 
    (sequel to: Private’s Progress [1956]);
13. 
    (sequel to: Per un Pugno di Dollari [1964]);
14. &
    (sequels to: Quatermass Xperiment [1955] & X the Unknown [1956]);
15. 
    (sequel to: Pumping Iron [1977]);
16. & 
    (sequels to: Rush Hour [1998]);
17. 
    (sequel to: Shanghai Noon [2000]);
18. 
    (sequel to: Pink Panther [1963]);
19. 
    (sequel to: Star Trek: The Motion Picture [1979]);
20. 
    (sequel to: That’ll Be the Day [1973]);
21. 
    (sequel to: Wong Fei Hung [1991]).

---

Sequels that were just as good as their originals:

1. 
   (sequel to: Ace Ventura: Pet Detective [1994]);
2. 
   (sequel to: The Addams Family [1991]);
3. 
   (sequel to: Alfie [1966]);
4. 
   (sequel to: Babe [1995]);
5. 
   (sequel to: Before Sunrise [1995]);
6. 
   (sequel to: Carry on Doctor [1968]);
7. 
   (sequel to: The Hustler [1961]);
8. 
   (sequel to: The Three Musketeers [1973]);
9. 
   (prequel to: Gettysburg [1993]);
10. 
    (sequel to: Honey [2003]);
11. 
    (sequel to: Indigènes [2006]);
12. 
    (sequel to: Our Man Flint [1965]);
13. 
    (sequel to: Le Déclin de l’Empire Américain [1986]);
14. 
    (sequel to: Romancing the Stone [1984]);
15. 
    (sequel to: The Magnificent Seven [1960]);
16. 
    (sequel to: Clear and Present Danger [1994]);
17. & 
    (sequels to: Toy Story [1995]);
18. 
    (sequel to: Wall Street [1987]).

---

---

Appendixes

Further Reading:

1. Carolyn Jess-Cooke, Constantine Verevis (2010), Second takes: critical approaches to the film sequel, SUNY Press, ISBN 9781438430294.

External Links:

1. Cliffhanger;
2. Cover versions of songs;
3. Crossover (fiction);
4. Film series;
5. List of film remakes;
6. List of British television series based on American television series;
7. List of English-language films with previous foreign-language film versions;
8. List of American television series based on British television series;
9. List of television programs based on films;
10. List of video game franchises;
11. List of film sequels by box-office improvement;
12. List of the longest gaps between film sequels;
13. Media franchise;
14. Prequel;
15. Reboot (fiction);
16. Remake;
17. Re-master
18. Retcon;
19. Sequel;
20. Shot-for-shot;
21. Spin-off (media);
22. Spiritual successor;
23. Standalone film;
24. Tetralogy;
25. Trilogy;
26. Video game remake.

---

Web‑post copyright © 2017 Frank TALKER.
You can freely reproduce &/or redistribute this posting in any form,
citing: “(http://franktalker5.blogspot.co.uk)”.
All other rights reserved.