How do you feel about American remakes of foreign films?

H

harmonica44

It's happening a lot more with foreign films than before nowadays. It doesn't really sit as well with me. I mean if I made a foreign film, then it got to the US, and they wanted to remake it, I would be honored. But I will also feel that it would take away from the original with a lot of western audiences. Kinda feels like you are taking away the specialness of the original by remaking it into something else.

One remake I liked a lot better was The Departed. More subplots and character development than the original, and more serious villains and other characters. But that too is also kind of bad, because what that does it make the original more inferior and less noticed, cause the remake did a better job. It means big bucks for the filmmakers to sell the rights for an American remake, but it also feels like selling out too. Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
There is always the option of... not watching it?
 
I was thinking this exact same thing last night when I saw that Cell 211 is getting an American remake. The first thing that sprang to mind was 'unnecessary', as the only films that they want to remake are, naturally, very successful foreign films. Therefore, the argument is why do they need to be remade if they are already very good films in their own right. Bergman and Kurosawa wouldn't have wanted their films remade so it seems a shame that modern foreign directors are doing so. Don't get me wrong, I can see why the foreign directors agree to it, and to be honest a lot of the time it's probably out of their hands, but I think it's a shame the American film industry elects to do remakes rather than potentially take a gamble by releasing more foreign films to cinemas. And not just ones like The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo or The Troll Hunter that have american remakes in the works.

edit: The Departed is very troubling as it is based on a very good film, but it is an amazing film. For me, this is the main example of the counter argument, with Let Me In close behind, wherein it can be argued that if a filmmaker sees potential to further expand and develop the story, why not run with that? Having said that, I'm probably really biased as a huge Scorsese fan ;)
 
Last edited:
Kurosawa has had tons of his films remade. Often with pretty good results. As much as we like to think we're all one big global culture, we are a myriad of individual cultures, with symbols and narrative devices. As a westerner, you're going to get a lot more out of The Magnificent Seven than you are The Seven Samurai, though there's nothing to say you can't enjoy both (and learn about another culture from the original). Sometimes you want to learn about another culture. Sometimes you just want to watch a story unfold. As a video gamer (and particularly fond of Japanese RPGs), there's a difference between a translation and a localization. The former is more "authentic", but the latter is a better narrative experience (if done well).

Me, I love foreign films. I love to learn about other cultures, and the stories they tell. I used to be pretty anti-american remake, but I think what I am is anti SHODDY american remake. If films are storytelling for the masses, why not tell it in a language they understand (note: I'm not talking about dialogue here). I've even softened on remakes as I grow older; Shakespeare's plays are STILL being remade. If you've the inclination, why not do it? It'd be nice if you did it WELL though.

So who's up for re-doing "Wild Strawberries" with me?
 
Maybe a slightly moot point, but I thought the Magnificent Seven borrowed very heavily from Seven Samurai, as opposed to being a straight remake, much like A Fistful of Dollars. Although a look on wikipedia does show he has had a few remakes.

I think the main point I would have to agree on is the negativity towards poor remakes. Perhaps why the Departed stands out as such an amazing film regardless of it being a remake.
 
Imo some remakes aren't bad at all but i think its a low percentage. And im counting both remakes of foreign films and remakes of older western films.

Last remake i watched was The Next Three Days and save for one scene which i thought was unnecessary, it was overall pretty good.
 
I don't mind; as it can introduce a great movie to a casual movie watcher that will otherwise go unnoticed.

Other than that, I always thought fanboys seek recognition from seeing the original, so they complain. IMO of course.
 
I don't mind remakes. I've never tried to estimate the percentage of remakes that end up being better than the original. Could be 50%.

I'm a big fan of Cameron Crowe's "Vanilla sky", a very underrated movie I think. I've watched the original Spanish movie too. To me "Vanilla sky" is vastly superior. And that's from somebody who can hardly stand Tom Cruise.
 
They're a solid business plan. You have a tried and true story and an audience of around 300 million who most likely would never see the foreign language original. Put some a-listers in for marketing and you're probably going to make your money back and then some.
 
Generally speaking, it's a bad idea. I see more remakes that not only stink, but find some amazing way to remove or destroy much of what was great about the original movie. (Regarding "Departed," Scorsese is allowed to remake whatever he wants -- he's earned every single filmmaker merit badge.)

I think that if a film is old enough -- at least thirty years -- then a remake becomes more acceptable. But when an original film was made two years prior to the American version, then no thank you. To me it often comes across as arrogant, thinly-veiled cultural imperialism. (Like making "Avatar," or the long-rumored "Akira" live action version without Asians. WTF?)

People who don't like reading subtitles can suck it.
 
DirtyPicturesTV said:
Generally speaking, it's a bad idea. I see more remakes that not only stink, but find some amazing way to remove or destroy much of what was great about the original movie. (Regarding "Departed," Scorsese is allowed to remake whatever he wants -- he's earned every single filmmaker merit badge.)

I think that if a film is old enough -- at least thirty years -- then a remake becomes more acceptable. But when an original film was made two years prior to the American version, then no thank you. To me it often comes across as arrogant, thinly-veiled cultural imperialism. (Like making "Avatar," or the long-rumored "Akira" live action version without Asians. WTF?)

People who don't like reading subtitles can suck it.
Click to expand...

I'm usually very apathetic, but when someone brings up Akira and they complain about it being made into a live action I just feel like raging.

Why does it bother you?
 
DirtyPicturesTV said:
Generally speaking, it's a bad idea. I see more remakes that not only stink, but find some amazing way to remove or destroy much of what was great about the original movie. (Regarding "Departed," Scorsese is allowed to remake whatever he wants -- he's earned every single filmmaker merit badge.)

I think that if a film is old enough -- at least thirty years -- then a remake becomes more acceptable. But when an original film was made two years prior to the American version, then no thank you. To me it often comes across as arrogant, thinly-veiled cultural imperialism. (Like making "Avatar," or the long-rumored "Akira" live action version without Asians. WTF?)

People who don't like reading subtitles can suck it.
Click to expand...

I agree that it become more acceptable after 30 years or so, cause times have changed and technology, so you can do different things with the story more. So how come foreign countries never seem to remake American movies? Or do they, and America never orders them in? Scorsese remakes a Hong Kong movie, but can you imagine how strange it would be if Hong Kong remade a Scorsese movie?
 
It kind of makes me angry. Same as with reboots and remakes. Why bother spending time and energy creating anything new when you can go with a tried and true winner, right Hollywood?

Meanwhile, on the Pirate Bay...
 
PaulGriffith said:
They're a solid business plan. You have a tried and true story and an audience of around 300 million who most likely would never see the foreign language original. Put some a-listers in for marketing and you're probably going to make your money back and then some.
Click to expand...

I agree with Paul. If the film was in a foreign Language then most of the American Audience probably will not watch it because it is not in English. Second people that have all ready seen the original will likely watch the remake if they enjoyed the original. They want to see if the American version is good or not and what changes were made. It makes sense that it is a strong business case to make a remake of a popular foreign film. You have a film you can show potential investors to give them an Idea what the new film will be. You will also have a built in audience from people that have seen the original.

The Departed was well done probably one of the best remakes I have seen. Of course with some great actors too. I am a big fan.

Sidenote:
Remaking Spiderman makes me mad because we just had three movies and I liked 1 and 2. I thought it was stupid restarting Spiderman. I would rather had Spiderman 4 with the same cast.
 
Last edited:
rockerrockstar said:
Sidenote:
Remaking Spiderman makes me mad because we just had three movies and I liked 1 and 2. I thought it was stupid restarting Spiderman. I would rather had Spiderman 4 with the same cast.
Click to expand...

Ugh, this times a thousand. Can't get the same cast? Why not recast and continue the story? I mean, I get reboots and sometimes they're done well (can't argue with Nolan's Batman movies). But Spiderman 3 wasn't that long ago, and frankly, I think we've all seen Spidey's origin a couple times in the past 40 odd years (wow, I just looked it up. 49 years. Pretty impressive!)

Not that Raimi's films were perfect; he didn't care for Venom and it showed. But a new cast/director, with a bit of creative tweaking you could get another chance at that. But he did the origin story well, so I can't think of any reason to pretend that it didn't happen.

I recognize that comic books themselves reboot every once in a while (I think DC is doing a universe-wide reboot now/soon/recently), but at least they carry on the story a little bit longer.
 
I agree with Spider-man. They think that just because they can't get the same actor, that they have to remake the whole origin story now. Haven't any of the filmmakers ever heard of James Bond? If he can get away with going from one actor to another, why can't Spider-man?
 
It's not because it's a different actor but an entirely different team. It would feel strange continuing a story when everyone is different and it looks, sounds, feels and is acted different. James Bond was a name assumed by what ever agent was 007, or at least they acknowledge that there have been several 007's.

After Dark Knight Rises would you want to see Batman with different actors and director?

I'm going to see spiderman. Kinda sorta looking forward to it. May not be great, but that hopefully won't stop it from being fun. And who knows, Nolan reinventing Batman made one of the most awesome superhero movie series ever, way better (IMO) than the 90's Batmans. The Spiderman reboot could be the same thing.... "Could be" haha.
 
The Spider-man reboot actually looks better in the previews I'll admit. One of my problems with the original was how after Peter got bit by the Spider, he was acting all happy and fun with it, and learned his skills and web swinging too quickly. Instead of being traumatically worried about being able to do all that, and not even going to the emergency room, or anything.

I was told he was happy in the comics after and it's based of that, but it still wasn't very convincing at all. In this new trailer, he looks actually scared, but we'll see what happens. However James Bond is also made by different people per movie. Different directors, art directors, DPs, and a new producer now then the one before, even though they are father and daughter.

Fans of current Bond, will be sad to see him leave when he does, but that goes for fans every Bond, just like Bale in Batman. So how is Bond different still?
 
PaulGriffith said:
They're a solid business plan. You have a tried and true story and an audience of around 300 million who most likely would never see the foreign language original. Put some a-listers in for marketing and you're probably going to make your money back and then some.
Click to expand...

I thought the American remake of The Grudge was great but yeah I think Paul hits the nail on the head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top