TopBilled

Remake vs. original / Remake vs. another remake

81 posts in this topic

On 4/2/2019 at 3:20 PM, Michael Rennie said:

I cannot think of any other film to do that. Why?

There are a lot of Exploitation films made in the years 1968-70 that switch from Black & White to Color roughly when Black & White films were being abandoned. They usually make the switch when someone drops acid or does some other drug and it's a hallucinatory sequence. One title that comes to mind is The Animal (1968).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often wondered(since my mind gets off-rails this way) If anyone back in the primarily B&W era developed an aversion to the sight of CHOCOLATE SYRUP the way others in more recent years developed an aversion to the sight of BLOOD due to gallons of IT used in horror flicks?  :P

Sepiaotne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2019 at 9:58 PM, TopBilled said:

Dargo,

Did you see my comment about PUBLIC HERO NO. 1 and THE GET-AWAY? In that case only six years had passed, no new technologies were used, and it was a shot-for-shot remake also in black-and-white.

In the 30s and 40s I think you saw this a great deal because they were remaking their B pictures. Public Hero No. 1 was probably a B feature that played before the A feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, calvinnme said:

In the 30s and 40s I think you saw this a great deal because they were remaking their B pictures. Public Hero No. 1 was probably a B feature that played before the A feature.

Actually I think what happened was the "B" film unit was remaking some of the studio's old "A" pictures. Especially at Warner Brothers. This is because they had limited budgets and couldn't waste money purchasing the rights to new stories. Also, since these stories had already proven to be crowd pleasers, they had a certain appeal to exhibitors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TopBilled said:

Actually I think what happened was the "B" film unit was remaking some of the studio's "A" pictures. Especially at Warner Brothers. This is because they had limited budgets and couldn't waste money purchasing the rights to new stories. Also, because these stories had already proven to be crowd pleasers, they had a certain appeal to exhibitors.

Warners was a poverty row studio whose biggest star was Rin Tin Tin  until Vitaphone and The Jazz Singer began to make it rich. So yes, that is possible because WB grew up very fast. One A list film I can think of that was remade was 1941's High Sierra. It was remade as Colorado Territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, calvinnme said:

Warners was a poverty row studio whose biggest star was Rin Tin Tin  until Vitaphone and The Jazz Singer began to make it rich. So yes, that is possible because WB grew up very fast. One A list film I can think of that was remade was 1941's High Sierra. It was remade as Colorado Territory.

Not sure if you saw my earlier post(s) to Dargo on this subject. I had previously mentioned how THE PETRIFIED FOREST was remade by Warners, with the characters slightly updated to reflect WWII concerns. That property had been a huge hit on Broadway, and the studio paid good money to purchase the rights. The 1936 screen adaptation was definitely an "A" film. The remake, 1945's ESCAPE IN THE DESERT, doesn't use very well-known actors and is directed by someone (Edward Blatt) who was not an "A" list motion picture director. So it's a cheaper "B" version.

COLORADO TERRITORY is a different kind of Warner Brothers remake. In that case, they were taking a hit crime drama and remolding it as a western. MGM did the same thing later, when it waved its wand and magically turned THE ASPHALT JUNGLE into THE BADLANDERS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

Not sure if you saw my earlier post(s) to Dargo on this subject. I had previously mentioned how THE PETRIFIED FOREST was remade by Warners, with the characters slightly updated to reflect WWII concerns. That property had been a huge hit on Broadway, and the studio paid good money to purchase the rights. The 1936 screen adaptation was definitely an "A" film. The remake, 1945's ESCAPE IN THE DESERT, doesn't use very well-known actors and is directed by someone (Edward Blatt) who was not an "A" list motion picture director. So it's a cheaper "B" version. 

No I didn't see it and I've never even heard of "Escape in the Desert". WB did the same thing with Desert Song. Originally one of the very early talkies it was remade with a WWII viewpoint, then remade again in the 1950s.

Probably the most worn out of the remakes is "A Star is Born". Originally RKO's 1932 film "What Price Hollywood", it did not have a drunken husband in it. Then it was made four times with "A Star is Born" as the name - 1937, 1954, 1976, and the 2018 version. I don't know what the 2018 version was trying to prove other than what is not politically correct will never make it into an American film. For example, I think in all of the versions with a drunken husband, the wife wins an award and the drunken husband wanders onstage completely sauced and ends up accidentally striking the wife. That was put there just to show how low he had come. In the 2018 version the husband just wets himself. I really don't care for all of these "PC Police Approved" remakes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, calvinnme said:

No I didn't see it and I've never even heard of "Escape in the Desert". WB did the same thing with Desert Song. Originally one of the very early talkies it was remade with a WWII viewpoint, then remade again in the 1950s.

Probably the most worn out of the remakes is "A Star is Born". Originally RKO's 1932 film "What Price Hollywood", it did not have a drunken husband in it. Then it was made four times with "A Star is Born" as the name - 1937, 1954, 1976, and the 2018 version. I don't know what the 2018 version was trying to prove other than what is not politically correct will never make it into an American film. For example, I think in all of the versions with a drunken husband, the wife wins an award and the drunken husband wanders onstage completely sauced and ends up accidentally striking the wife. That was put there just to show how low he had come. In the 2018 version the husband just wets himself. I really don't care for all of these "PC Police Approved" remakes.

I think there is some benefit in the PC-influenced films that Hollywood is now making. Studios are demonstrating responsibility in the way men and women are depicted on screen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I think there is some benefit in the PC-influenced films that Hollywood is now making. Studios are demonstrating responsibility in the way men and women are depicted on screen. 

Just because they are more responsible in depicting men and woman on screen doesn't mean it will change men and women in real life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Det Jim McLeod said:

Just because they are more responsible in depicting men and woman on screen doesn't mean it will change men and women in real life. 

But it could.

To me, this is preferable than those years where people accused record labels and movie studios of having a harmful effect on consumers because of the violent and often sexually suggestive content they were putting out. Those entertainment companies continually washed their hands of any responsibility, sometimes getting off the hook in court cases where they were not deemed liable for the products they were pushing on consumers.

Now the pendulum has swung the other way. Hollywood companies are being forced to make changes, because of outside pressure, if they want to remain profitable and not have their products boycotted. Social media has been a large contributor to these changes. The Twitter and Facebook crowd are in control now...not these entertainment conglomerates. 

We can live with a scene where a woman being hit or slapped is taken out. We can live with a man being depicted as less violent towards women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not know that "Colorado Territory" was a remake of "High Sierra" utilizing the same Director as "High Sierra".  

 

I do know that "I Died A Thousand Times" was almost a shot for shot remake of "High Sierra" with the same characters and locations as "High Sierra".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I think there is some benefit in the PC-influenced films that Hollywood is now making. Studios are demonstrating responsibility in the way men and women are depicted on screen.  

Yes, but they go too far. The country is more diverse, isn't it enough to have a diverse cast? And why must every film be about some topical social issue? Why is every Best Picture winner about some social issue? Why can't a Best Picture winner just be a very entertaining film? I'm getting way OT here, but all of this PC police stuff is becoming a bug not a feature IMHO.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, johnpressman said:

I did not know that "Colorado Territory" was a remake of "High Sierra" utilizing the same Director as "High Sierra".  

 

I do know that "I Died A Thousand Times" was almost a shot for shot remake of "High Sierra" with the same characters and locations as "High Sierra".  

Likewise I didn't know that "I Died A Thousand Times" was a remake of High Sierra. I've never seen it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Other reasons for remakes were, for remaking movies of 1928-34 or so...the perceived technological advance from that seen as stiff and music-lighter and stagey early sound films - and the dissapproval by Breen, et all, of some Pre-Code films' naughtiness. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...It appears that, during the later silent era, remakes were made of stories from only a few years earlier within the silent era - To make I suppose longer versions? Higher-budget versions? As silent films became more like the features we know? In 1927, Gloria Swanson independently produced THE LOVE OF SUNYA - and hired the same director who had helmed an earlier movie of the same play...in 1919!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Walter L. said:

...It appears that, during the later silent era, remakes were made of stories from only a few years earlier within the silent era - To make I suppose longer versions? Higher-budget versions? As silent films became more like the features we know? In 1927, Gloria Swanson independently produced THE LOVE OF SOYNA - and hired the same director who had helmed an earlier movie of the same play...in 1919!!!

Yes, this is an interesting subtopic under remakes. Probably these silent remakes were financially motivated-- the studio or the production company already owned the story, it had been successful in the past, and the big name stars involved needed a prestige project to remain in the public eye.

Plus as you said they were expanding the story, and turning the idea/concept into a more substantial feature film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Except that, comparing the two versions of them - Wikipedia lists the exact same length for both of them! I wonder if Gloria's was a shot by shot remake, then...They are both available on DVD, so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Walter L. said:

...Except that, comparing the two versions of them - Wikipedia lists the exact same length for both of them! I wonder if Gloria's was a shot by shot remake, then...They are both available on DVD, so...

Was there a change in directors or leading man? I'm sure there's a reason why she redid it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There needs to be a remake of village of the giants with a bunch of 30 foot teen girls picking up ;) their straying boyfriends.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Walter L. said:

...Other reasons for remakes were, for remaking movies of 1928-34 or so...the perceived technological advance from that seen as stiff and music-lighter and stagey early sound films - and the dissapproval by Breen, et all, of some Pre-Code films' naughtiness.  

The lost "Gold Diggers of Broadway" (1929) was remade (somewhat) as "Gold Diggers of 1933". It was a technical improvement and qualitatively it was an improvement - still precode.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...You saw The Gold Diggers Of Broadway? Congratulations on living well into your 90s or beyond!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Walter L. said:

...You saw The Gold Diggers Of Broadway? Congratulations on living well into your 90s or beyond!!!

Uh,  that is Gold Diggers OF Broadway,  not Gold Diggers ON Broadway.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 7:31 AM, jamesjazzguitar said:

Uh,  that is Gold Diggers OF Broadway,  not Gold Diggers ON Broadway.      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...I didn't write " On ' in my post. What are you referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2019 at 8:21 AM, TopBilled said:

Was there a change in directors or leading man? I'm sure there's a reason why she redid it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...The earlier version and Gloria's version had the same director.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...I lost a draft:-(.  The 1939 version of RAFFLES that was shown just recently was referred to by Maltin as a near shot by shot remake of the 1930 version. There are two silent versions of RAFFLES I've found listed, also 1919 and 1927 IIRC...Perhaps they took different approaches that the two sound versions, but anyway that's 3 versions in less than 15 years!!!!!

  I believe that, in the pre-TV era, studios paid little attention to old films. I think that many more old films would be lost films now if not for: (1) Television coming along and providing a market for these older films (2) dedicated film fans looking to save old films, with the studios themselves offering no help.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us