Motion Pictures that should NEVER be remade?

[Naphtali]

Are there motion pictures so intimately linked to their stars/cast or the director's style that they cannot be remade successfully? I think there are, for example,

The Searchers (1956). Is it likely another actor could portray the vengeful, tortured soul of Ethan Edwards more poignantly than John Wayne?

The Third Man (1949). Harry Lime. Baron Kurtz. Holly Martins -- Orson Welles, Ernst Deutsch, Joseph Cotten.

The Professionals (1966). Casting and cinematic perfection.

The Americanization of Emily (1964). Who but James Garner can be an attractive egomaniacal S.O.B. and force you to like him?

The Maltese Falcon (1941). See what happened when the team wasn't assembled? "Satan was a Lady," and in 1931 Ricardo Cortez as Humphrey Bogart?

Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948). Casting, cinematic, and directorial perfection.
***
Your turn.

 

[carter]

The African Queen - Bogart and Hepburn.
Casablance - They'd never assemble a cast of this caliber today.
Ninotchka - Greta Garbo and Melvin Douglas.

 

[The Wolf]

I hope "Laura" is never remade. The cast was great. I fear what "improvements" a new filmmaker would add.
Even though William Powell isn't quite the rough and tumble Pinkerton agent that Nick is in the novel of "The Thin Man" he is Nick Charles none the less and noone can replace Myrna Loy.

I would be curious to see a version of "The Maltese Falcon" that is more faithful to the book. It still might not be as good as the Huston/Bogart version but I would be interestied in watching it.

Sincerely,
The Wolf

 

[Lady Day]

Anything made by Hitchcock, or anything Saul Bass did a poster for.

LD

 

[Starius]

I think there are quite a few movies that would pale as remakes, thanks to the magic of the original formula, actors, and creators.

Citizen Kane, for example. Or even films like Jerry Lewis movies, Bob Hope movies, or Audrey Hepburn movies.

Sometimes, however, a story is worth retelling again and again for new generations. Take movie versions of 20,000 leagues under the sea. Here is a movie thats been remade, probably a dozen times. My personal favorite is the 1954 version with Kirk Douglas, but that wasn't the first version by any means. I know the film was also made in 1907 and 1917. I think I'll see a few more versions pop up in my own lifetime. And you know what? I'll always give it a watch, no matter who is in it.

But yes, sometimes a good movie is based on a good story, and sometimes a good movie is good because of the magic the performers put into it....

 

[Feraud]

I see no reason why any film should not be remade if attempting to tell a story as well as possible.

Remakes take nothing away from the classic films we appreciate.
In this day and age with the proliferation of nearly every movie and tv show on dvd, there is less chance of a classic being overshadowed by a remake and higher probability of appreciation by a new audience for the better version.

Whatever it takes to inspire even one movie viewer to seek out a classic film is okey with me.

 

[Spitfire]

:eusa_clap I am with Feraud on that one.
Why be afraid of remakes - is it because we like to live on "the good old days"? Where everything was better and movies were black and white?
And the actors were larger than life?
(Humphrey Bogart wasn't such a great actor after all.)
Sean Connery used to be the only true James Bond - but there is a new kind in the game now. Tougher, wilder and younger.
That does not mean that the old James - Connery - Bond is out.
Now there are only two to enjoy.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Chaplin's "City Lights." It *couldn't* be remade.

 

[Rachael]

I could go on and on about remakes that should not have been made; City of Angels leaps to mind. Then there are the ones that beg for a remake, such as Grapes of Wrath with the rough edges from the novel put back in.

But I will have to agree that in the end Hollywood does have to make a buck, and no matter how bad the remake (Sabrina) it always sheds a little spotlight on the original. Often video rental places will have a display at the end of an aisle with both versions side by side, which brings the older film to a whole new audience. So I suppose I will cringe in silence and be glad the next generation has access to the greats.

On another tangent, there are amazing films being made today by studios who aren't bent on recyling stories. Imagine how upset our children will be in 40 years when those start going down the remake road. Who will play in the re-imagining of The Matrix? Will they lament the loss of grit in a sanitized version of Pulp Fiction? Time will tell.

 

[Naphtali]

No one has mentioned "Patton" (1970). No need to mention more about it.
***
Rachel: I agree on "Sabrina." I'll raise you "The Lady Killers," "The Manchurian Candidate," and "The In-Laws." Ed Wood would have been proud to be associated with them.
***
That "in the end Hollywood does have to make a buck" is not, in my estimation, a worthy rationale to butcher a film. In some cases the film should not have been a bad one and could -- should -- stand on its merits with an original title. A good example is "The Manchurian Candidate," starring Densel Washington. It was well acted, well crafted. The plot was distorted solely to be able to use the title. Had that title not been used, plot might have been adjusted to make sense, allowing superior crafting of the production to benefit.

 

[Feraud]

Anything made by Hitchcock,

An exception can always pop up, subjectively speaking.
A Perfect Murder is a remake of Hitchcock's Dial 'M' For Murder and a good drama too. The capable cast (Michael Douglas, Viggio Mortensen, David Suchet), great location shots (NYC) and well directed story (husband pays wife's lover to murder wife) makes for an engaging film.

As much as I like Dial M, I think it (both films actually) suffers from a terrible female lead. I cared very little for the bland Grace Kelly and her fate. Would it be wrong to say I was disappointed when Ray Milland was caught?

 

[RIOT]

American Graffiti (1973) and Ocean's Eleven (1960) should have been left alone the first time around.

 

[Feraud]

American Graffiti (1973)

this was remade??

 

[BAZ]

No one has mentioned "Patton" (1970). No need to mention more about it.

Maybe to correct historical inaccuracies, I think it SHOULD be remade!
As should "Battle Of The Bulge"!!

Hollywood just seems to remake "classics" because there's no good, original scripts, or writers who can be bothered to actually THINK up a new story/idea/scenario.
And remaking a movie JUST because we have better technology today isn't an excuse. Misunderstanding an original's motives or message is a common mistake.
Look at the upcoming "Day The Earth Stood Still"!!

 

[Naphtali]

An exception can always pop up, subjectively speaking.
A Perfect Murder is a remake of Hitchcock's Dial 'M' For Murder and a good drama too. The capable cast (Michael Douglas, Viggio Mortensen, David Suchet), great location shots (NYC) and well directed story (husband pays wife's lover to murder wife) makes for an engaging film.

As much as I like Dial M, I think it (both films actually) suffers from a terrible female lead. I cared very little for the bland Grace Kelly and her fate. Would it be wrong to say I was disappointed when Ray Milland was caught?

Thank you for illustrating my point. This is not a remake to my mind. It is merely a strongly similar plot. The title change allowed for adjustments to accommodate different time, location, etc.

 

[RIOT]

this was remade??

Sorry, not a remake but a sequel. My mind is in a million places right now.

 

[Lincsong]

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.

Too late for this one, but Ocean's 11 should never have been remade. How they did two sequels to the remake is confusing.:whip:

 

[JimInSoCalif]

It has already been mentioned, but here is another vote for Casablanca. Not only is the cast great, but the black and white photography is lovely - sure glad Ted Turner did not colorize it.

Hmm... Maybe any movie with Bogart would suffer as a remake.

Any W.C. Fields movies. Of course, those were not much about plot and mostly about Fields who I thought was a very funny man.

Cheers, Jim.

 

[Lulu-in-Ny]

I could go on and on about remakes that should not have been made; City of Angels leaps to mind.

Oh yes. Wings of Desire is one of my favorite films of all time, and this mess just made me angry and ill, all at the same time. They missed the boat completely. Wenders should have sued...
The Magnificent Seven (Seven Samurai) was a good remake. It retold the story, but made it it's own film.
Pandora's Box. I live in constant fear of someone deciding to remake this.
To Kill A Mockingbird There is no one who could deliver the performance that would be necessary to make this work.
Rules of the Game The best film ever made about class distinction, and one of the best films ever made, period.

 

[Diamondback]

Maybe to correct historical inaccuracies, I think it SHOULD be remade!
As should "Battle Of The Bulge"!!

Problem: at filming time, all they had to work from was Farago's book and Bradley's recollections (the latter I consider "suspect")--the Patton estate wouldn't cooperate with any effort to tell the story.

Even if we have a whole new "blank-slate" take on Patton, and also on MacArthur, the right men for the roles are both gone: Kelsey Grammer (An American Carol) ain't nowhere near George C. Scott, and I don't see anyone competing with Gregory Peck's delivery of Mac's oratory. (He actually did his own research and made them rewrite a lot of the movie to be more accurate--how many of today's Tinseltwits would do that?) Granted, Peck and Jerry Goldsmith's music were about the only bright spots in the latter...