Directors who revisit their own movies.

[slaytonf]

No great mystery what brought this to mind, tonight's double Ozu feature on the Import series, A Story of Floating Weeds (1932), and Floating Weeds (1959).  No need to go into great detail here about them.  They've both been on TCM before.  They both tell the same story.  They both manage to be different movies.  And they are both some of his best work.  

So naturally, that gets me thinking about directors who revisit their work in later years.  Not many I can think of.  And in truth I believe there aren't many to think of.  Hitchcock did it famously with The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934 and '56).  John Farrow did it with Five Came Back (1939), and Back From Eternity (1956).  And Leo McCarey did Love Affair (1939), and An Affair to Remember (1957). 

I'm risking the accusation of automatically liking the older of the two movie versions saying this, but with the exception of Ozu's movies, I think the earlier efforts are better, each for different reasons.  In Hitchcock's earlier movie, the Lawrence's are more equal partners in recovering their child.  It's Jill who snipers the bad guy on the rooftop.  In the later effort, Josephine McKenna is much more passive, in keeping with the contemporary mores, I suppose.  

In John Farrow's movies, it's the cast that makes the difference for me.  Of course, I really admire Robert Ryan and Rod Steiger, but the cast of the earlier movie has a much better lineup and chemistry.  

And as great as Deborah Kerr and Carry Grant are, they just can't match the wonderful off-hand way Charles Boyer and Irene Dunne toss out their lines in Love Affair.  

[hamradio]

Didn't this use to be called Directors Cut? 

[Dargo]

56 minutes ago, slaytonf said:

No great mystery what brought this to mind, tonight's double Ozu feature on the Import series, A Story of Floating Weeds (1932), and Floating Weeds (1959).  No need to go into great detail here about them.  They've both been on TCM before.  They both tell the same story.  They both manage to be different movies.  And they are both some of his best work.  

So naturally, that gets me thinking about directors who revisit their work in later years.  Not many I can think of.  And in truth I believe there aren't many to think of.  Hitchcock did it famously with The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934 and '56).  John Farrow did it with Five Came Back (1939), and Back From Eternity (1956).  And Leo McCarey did Love Affair (1939), and An Affair to Remember (1957). 

I'm risking the accusation of automatically liking the older of the two movie versions saying this, but with the exception of Ozu's movies, I think the earlier efforts are better, each for different reasons.  In Hitchcock's earlier movie, the Lawrence's are more equal partners in recovering their child.  It's Jill who snipers the bad guy on the rooftop.  In the later effort, Josephine McKenna is much more passive, in keeping with the contemporary mores, I suppose.  

In John Farrow's movies, it's the cast that makes the difference for me.  Of course, I really admire Robert Ryan and Rod Steiger, but the cast of the earlier movie has a much better lineup and chemistry.  

And as great as Deborah Kerr and Carry Grant are, they just can't match the wonderful off-hand way Charles Boyer and Irene Dunne toss out their lines in Love Affair.  

In this last example of yours here slayton, I've always thought Boyer played it a little more "sensitively" than Grant did, and I also liked Dunne more in the role because she plays it a little more "tough" than Kerr was able to muster.

(...and btw, you also have DeMille doing a remake of his The Ten Commandments, and also Hawks basic redux of his earlier Rio Bravo with El Dorado)

  

[slaytonf]

Thanks for the extra examples!

Oddly, according to MovieCollector, it looks like TCM has shown neither version The Ten Commandments.  So I can't comment on the two.  And I won't rely on my long-ago memories of watching the latter movie on, um, ABC, wasn't it?

 

As for Hawks' movies, let's just say he's one of the best, but the less said about these two movies, the better.

 

[sewhite2000]

This is such a rarity that I imagine virtually all the examples have already been given. The only other instances that immediately jump to mind are alternate-language remakes, such as Von Sternberg shooting both German and English language versions of The Blue Angel. In modern times, Michael Haneke did a virtual shot-for-shot remake of the German films Funny Games with an English-speaking cast.

[Wayne]

Frank Capra remade his 1935 racetrack comedy Broadway Bill (which had starred Warner Baxter) as a 1950 musical, Riding High, starring Bing Crosby. 

[LawrenceA]

5 minutes ago, Wayne said:

Frank Capra remade his 1935 racetrack comedy Broadway Bill (which had starred Warner Baxter) as a 1950 musical, Riding High, starring Bing Crosby. 

Capra also did Lady for a Day and A Pocketful of Miracles.

[Sukhov]

1 hour ago, sewhite2000 said:

 In modern times, Michael Haneke did a virtual shot-for-shot remake of the German films Funny Games with an English-speaking cast.

And of course Sluizer remade Spoorloos as the Vanishing in 1993.

[Sukhov]

South African sci fi movie District 9 is also a full length version of the director's earlier Alive in Joburg.

[CinemaInternational]

There is also the matter of quasi-retakes. Howard Hawks directed both 1938's Bringing Up Baby and 1964's Man's Favorite Sport. Plotwise, they are not alike, no leopards or dinosaur bones appeared in the later film. But in terms of the  dynamics of the two main characters (bumbing, socially awkward man, brash, life-loving, eccentric woman) they feel almost like they are connected.

 

And as for people remaking their own outright, Sidney Franklin did The Barretts of Wimpole Street twice. Both versions were good, but the Norma Shearer version was better.

[Wayne]

Howard Hawks remade Ball of Fire (1941) as the 1948 Danny Kaye musical A Song is Born.

[jakeem]

Then there are feature versions of student films. One of the best examples: George Lucas' futuristic "THX 1138" (1971), based on his 1967 film at the University of Southern California's School of Cinematic Arts. The feature version, which was Lucas' directorial debut, starred Robert Duvall and Donald Pleasence.

 

[slaytonf]

5 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

Capra also did Lady for a Day and A Pocketful of Miracles.

Another one where the earlier effort is definitely the better one.

[Sepiatone]

I actually think they're "as good as".

But I will ALWAYS strenuously protest all the nonsense that EL DORADO( '67)  is a "remake" of RIO BRAVO( '59)

1st,  although some characters ARE similar in type ,  The STORIES bear absolutely NO resemblance to each other,  not even CLOSE enough to be considered the SAME story told with different actors.  The CLOSEST similarity is that both stories take place in Texas.

2nd;  IMHO, despite a fine performance(no surprise) by ROBERT MITCHUM, the EARLIER movie( Rio Brovo) is FAR SUPERIOR to the latter.

Sepiatone

[TomJH]

Raoul Walsh remade High Sierra as a western (Colorado Territory).

Likewise the story line between Objective Burma and, again, a western, Distant Drums, are very similar, both directed by Walsh.

[Det Jim McLeod]

William Wyler first made "These Three" in 1936 and remade it in 1961 as "The Children's Hour. 

The original is still the best, because of Bonita Granville. She is absolutely chilling as the malicious school girl. 

The remake has some good points, mostly for the casting of Audrey Hepburn and Shirley MacLaine and keeping to the original story of lesbianism and the tragic ending. But the movie is sunk by the performance of Karen Balkin as the little liar, she cannot act at all and has a face that looks like she just sucked a lemon.

[TopBilled]

2 minutes ago, Det Jim McLeod said:

William Wyler first made "These Three" in 1936 and remade it in 1961 as "The Children's Hour. 

The original is still the best, because of Bonita Granville. She is absolutely chilling as the malicious school girl. 

The remake has some good points, mostly for the casting of Audrey Hepburn and Shirley MacLaine and keeping to the original story of lesbianism and the tragic ending. But the movie is sunk by the performance of Karen Balkin as the little liar, she cannot act at all and has a face that looks like she just sucked a lemon.

The remake benefits from the supporting performances rendered by Fay Bainter and Miriam Hopkins. It's especially great that Hopkins appears in both versions. She did several other films for Wyler and I am assuming she was one of his favorite actresses.

[CaveGirl]

13 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

And of course Sluizer remade Spoorloos as the Vanishing in 1993.

I was just going to mention those films by Sluizer.

Boy, talk about no comparison between the two. The original is incredible and scared the life out of me. The remake with Jeff Bridges is so horrid, I could hardly watch it. I blame not Sluizer or Bridges but the powers that be who probably thought the original was too dark. The original is a classic though with outstanding performances by a cast not very familiar to American audiences, but it is worth reading all the subtitles just to enjoy it.

[scsu1975]

DeMille "revisited" The Squaw Man twice. I've seen the original 1914 version, but not the 1918 version. The 1931 version occasionally pops up on TCM. Neither of the versions I've seen are great by any means, and I'm not sure which one I prefer.

[scsu1975]

Franz Wysbar directed the German film Fährmann Maria ("Ferryman Maria) in 1936, then, under the name Frank Wisbar, directed the American low-budget (but very effective remake) Stranger of the Swamp in 1946. Both films are highly recommended.

[slaytonf]

This is a longer list than I expected.   I wonder if any of these directors ever discussed why they revisited their previous work.  

[kingrat]

I actually prefer both the Hitchcock remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much and An Affair To Remember. The greater length and scope and the color cinematography are major pluses in both cases. Nothing wrong with Boyer and Dunne, but I like Grant and Kerr even better, and also prefer Cathleen Nesbitt to Ouspenskaya. Stewart, Day, and de Banzie (great name for a law firm) outweigh even the excellence of Peter Lorre, the strongest asset of the earlier Hitchcock version. In both cases, I care more about the characters in the remake.

 

 

[jakeem]

13 hours ago, scsu1975 said:

DeMille "revisited" The Squaw Man twice. I've seen the original 1914 version, but not the 1918 version. The 1931 version occasionally pops up on TCM. Neither of the versions I've seen are great by any means, and I'm not sure which one I prefer.

DeMille was involved with two versions of "The Buccaneer," the story of the early 19th-century Louisiana privateer Jean Lafitte. The veteran filmmaker produced and directed the 1938 Paramount version, which starred Fredric March as the title character. General Andrew Jackson, the hero of the Battle of New Orleans in January 1815, was portrayed by Hugh Sothern (pictured below with March).

Two decades later, DeMille was in failing health, but he served as the nominal executive producer of Paramount's 1958 remake of "The Buccaneer" and appeared onscreen to introduce the film. The film was directed by DeMille's son-in-law at the time, the two-time Academy Award-winning actor Anthony Quinn. It was the only time that Quinn attempted duties behind the camera.

Yul Brynner (with hair) starred as Lafitte in the remake. As Andy Jackson, Charlton Heston revisited one of his most famous portrayals of a historical figure. He first appeared as the future American Commander-in-Chief in "The President's Lady" (1953).

DeMille died on January 21, 1959, seven weeks after the film was released.