Tomorrow, a new version of Wes Craven's horror classic A Nightmare on Elm Street is being released. From the plot synopsis, it appears to follows the original Nightmare exactly but with a new actor (Jackie Earl Haley from The Watchmen, Little Children and Shutter Island) taking over Robert Englund's role as Freddie Krueger. I was discussing the film with a friend and a question came up with how I felt about remakes.
While I would love to give a simple, kneejerk answer of "they stink. It's just Hollywood being lazy, unimaginative and greedy" (and that is no doubt true in many cases), I can't use that as a blanket statement. There are too many remakes that were worthy of being done and more than justified their existence:
- The Fly – the first and biggest example that I think when I think of worthy remakes. The original was a cheesy sci-fi film that is worthy of being ridiculed. The remake, on the other hand, was dark, scary, intentionally funny and featured Jeff Goldblum in Academy Award-nominated performance. The ending of the film is heartbreaking and proves the number 1 rule of worthy remakes – bring something new to the table.
- The Fugitive – One of Harrison Ford's best action movies that is a prime example of how to pace a chase movie (the plot is concisely taken care of before the opening credits are even done) that was a worthy nomination for Best Picture and proved a great showcase both for Ford and Best Supporting Actor Tommy Lee Jones. The movie does so many things right (beginning with the fact that you are rooting for both of the actors even though they are at odds with each other) that to write it off as a "cheap remake" of the 1960s tv series would be to do this movie a great disservice.
- Batman Begins – Granted, almost no one will blame Christopher Nolan for choosing to go back to the beginning of Batman rather than continue from the abomination that is Batman & Robin (a film that almost completely derailed a franchise). Thus, in this case, "rebooting" the franchise turned out to be a brilliant decision because it allowed Nolan to start fresh and tell the story in his fashion.
- Star Trek – This will remain the perfect example of how to do a reboot that satisfies fans of the original while allowing you to start new. Unlike Batman Begins, Abrams had the unenviable job of having to do a prequel that didn't mess with the continuity of the original series (and Star Trek fans would have been rabid if there were). His solution was brilliant – create an alternate universe. This way, he can tell whatever story he wants and there is no continuity to worry about. In hindsight, it's obvious but brilliant nonetheless.
What the above movies have in common is that the film makers were less concerned with simply riding on the coat tails of the original source material and were more interested in telling a new story in an interesting way. In those cases, the fact that it's not "original" is trivial because the story or the style of storytelling is so fresh that it is more than forgivable. In too many cases, though, a remake is so faithful to the original and there is absolutely nothing new about it that you wonder if it would just have been easier to clean up the original print and rerelease that. Possibly the worst example of this is Gus Van Sant's Psycho. The remake is, literally, a shot-for-shot remake of the Alfred Hitchcock classic, complete with the same music, same dialogue and same camera angles. The only difference is that there are different actors in the roles and the remake is in color while the original is in black and white. To call that "fresh" is a joke at best and makes you wonder why the studio even wasted the time and talents of Van Sant and actors like Vince Vaughn, Julianne Moore, Viggo Mortensen and William H. Macy among others.
Thus, will Nightmare on Elm Street be a worthy remake like The Fly or will it ring hollow and unnecessary like Psycho? I am a fan of the original film (despite its low budget and laughable acting, there are scenes that truly feel like they have come from a nightmare) and am cynical at best. But, I will go see it and, hopefully, will be proven wrong. Hopefully, director Samuel Bayer will find a new way to haunt our dreams and not make me say "Now, where the original DVD again?"
No comments:
Post a Comment