Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Original or Remake?


Recommended Posts

Quite a few of the noirs we're discussing have remakes, and I'm curious to hear which versions are your favorites.

 

Some possible comparisons:

 

1) The Long Goodbye--there was a 1955 TV-movie version of this one. I adore Eliot Gould's take on the Marlowe character in the 70s version. Anyone prefer the '55 version?

 

2) The Big Sleep--I don't think I've seen the 70s version with Robert Mitchum. I'm head over heels for the Bogart-Bacall version.

 

3) Farewell, My Lovely vs Murder, My Sweet--I'm definitely in the corner with the 70s version. I love the way that it manages to be faithful to the spirit of the novel while doing some innovative things with the characters. Plus, it just exudes grit.

 

4) The Killers--I really like both versions, with a slight edge to the 50s version with Burt Lancaster. Which do you prefer? They are both pretty amazing, I think.

 

5) The Desperate Hours--I think the older version is an okay movie. The 90s version is a sexist, hot mess.

 

6) Diabolique--I've seen and enjoyed both versions. But something about the black and white of the older version gives it the edge for me. I did like Kathy Bates as the detective in the remake, and I'll watch Isabelle Adjani in anything.

 

Any thoughts on these or other noirs with remakes? I know of quite a few whose remakes I haven't seen (DOA, Gun Crazy, etc). Any remakes definitely worth checking out?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Any thoughts on these or other noirs with remakes? I know of quite a few whose remakes I haven't seen (DOA, Gun Crazy, etc). Any remakes definitely worth checking out?

 

The pre-code version of The Maltese Falcon is incredibly skippable. But the 1936 version, called Satan Met A Lady, tells mostly the same story as almost a screwball comedy. It works a lot better than it should, and I enjoy it quite a bit.

 

I haven't seen the 1942 version of The Glass Key, which is the one on the schedule for this class, but the pre-code version is really good. It's surprisingly brutal at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen the 1942 version of The Glass Key, which is the one on the schedule for this class, but the pre-code version is really good. It's surprisingly brutal at times.

 

Interesting. I know that I've read The Glass Key, but I don't remember much about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Takoma1;

I'm Michael, Fort Collins, Colorado.

 

I know the The Killers (1946) version with Burt Lancaster you mentioned.  I prefer the 1964 version.  Don Siegel directed Lee Marvin, Angie Dickinson, John Cassavetes, and Ronald Reagan who said he regretted playing an antagonist in his final film before beginning a political career.

 

I like the color and brightness in contrast to the 1946 Robert Siodmak directed version with Burt Lancaster who plays Ole 'Swede' Anderson; also with Ava Gardner, Edmond O'Brian, and Albert Dekker.

 

I have to watch both versions again of Dead on Arrival, The Big Sleep, and The Long Goodbye and I think I remember being pleasantly surprised by the Eliot Gould performance.

 

Thanks for posting; I found this interesting; thanks.

 

Have a nice day.

Michael

Fort Collins, Colorado

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a couple of lesser-knownversions of "Diabolique". A 1974 made-for-TV movie called "Reflections of Murder" stars Sam Waterston, Tuesday Weld and Joan Hackett. A 1993 made-for-TV movie features Melissa "Half Pint" Gilbert, Bruce Boxleitner and Kate Vernon. (Gilbert and Boxleitner would marry two years later). Never saw that version, which IMDB users rated at 5.4/10. "Reflections of Murder', by comparison, scored at 7.2/10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the film noir classic "Mildred Pierce" (1945) versus the HBO miniseries "Mildred Pierce" (2011). The miniseries is earthier and more faithful to the James Cain novel that comparing the 1945 and 2011 versions is as different as drinking sparkling water and straight bourbon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the The Killers (1946) version with Burt Lancaster you mentioned.  I prefer the 1964 version.  Don Siegel directed Lee Marvin, Angie Dickinson, John Cassavetes, and Ronald Reagan who said he regretted playing an antagonist in his final film before beginning a political career.

 

I like the color and brightness in contrast to the 1946

 

Michael,

 

I definitely know what you mean about the color and brightness. In fact, that element really adds something to one of the last scenes in which a character dies on a green lawn on a beautiful technicolor day. There's a wonderful contrast between the bright colors and the horrible things that happen in the movie.

 

I think that I like the black and white because the characters feel boxed in by the shadows. To me it really adds a sense of atmosphere and claustrophobia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pre-code version of The Maltese Falcon is incredibly skippable. But the 1936 version, called Satan Met A Lady, tells mostly the same story as almost a screwball comedy. It works a lot better than it should, and I enjoy it quite a bit.

 

I haven't seen the 1942 version of The Glass Key, which is the one on the schedule for this class, but the pre-code version is really good. It's surprisingly brutal at times.

Actually the '31 version is worth a look it's Pre Code and closer to the novel in that it depicts Spade as a womanizer, and Bebe Daniels is way better than Mary Astor and quite the looker, though the rest of the '41 cast is superior and now Iconic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Takoma1;

I'm Michael, Fort Collins, Colorado.

 

I know the The Killers (1946) version with Burt Lancaster you mentioned.  I prefer the 1964 version.  Don Siegel directed Lee Marvin, Angie Dickinson, John Cassavetes, and Ronald Reagan who said he regretted playing an antagonist in his final film before beginning a political career.

 

I like the color and brightness in contrast to the 1946 Robert Siodmak directed version with Burt Lancaster who plays Ole 'Swede' Anderson; also with Ava Gardner, Edmond O'Brian, and Albert Dekker.

 

I have to watch both versions again of Dead on Arrival, The Big Sleep, and The Long Goodbye and I think I remember being pleasantly surprised by the Eliot Gould performance.

 

Thanks for posting; I found this interesting; thanks.

 

Have a nice day.

Michael

Fort Collins, Colorado

God no, the 1964 version of the Killers looses all the ominousness without the Chiaroscuro lighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the '31 version is worth a look it's Pre Code and closer to the novel in that it depicts Spade as a womanizer, and Bebe Daniels is way better than Mary Astor and quite the looker, though the rest of the '41 cast is superior and now Iconic. 

 

Yeah, I guess I was a bit harsh on it. It is worth watching. But it's the only one I have no desire to watch again. I found it unpleasant and flat. The 1941 version is so definitive that I'd prefer to live with that one. But then I also love Satan Met a Lady, which amuses me greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I guess I was a bit harsh on it. It is worth watching. But it's the only one I have no desire to watch again. I found it unpleasant and flat. The 1941 version is so definitive that I'd prefer to live with that one. But then I also love Satan Met a Lady, which amuses me greatly.

All three highlight different parts of the novel, the '31 version shows how slutty Bridgid O'Shaughnessy is in various sequences, depicts her strip search by Spade at the end and also shows a bit more of Chinatown. Satan Met a Lady shows the sip that carried the "horn" ( i.e. Maltese Falcon) burning in the harbor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All three highlight different parts of the novel, the '31 version shows how slutty Bridgid O'Shaughnessy is in various sequences, depicts her strip search by Spade at the end and also shows a bit more of Chinatown. Satan Met a Lady shows the sip that carried the "horn" ( i.e. Maltese Falcon) burning in the harbor.

 

I think I just hated that characterization of Sam Spade. Ricardo Cortez plays him as such a self-serving, grinning jackass. I'm not sure how much I can get away with in terms of language before the TCM censors block me out, but lets just say I found his smarmy grin to be incredibly annoying. And when he goes to the prison at the end, to basically gloat to the woman who I believe does love him that he got a promotion by turning her in, and then smiles that ****-eating grin at her. I just wanted to punch him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I just hated that characterization of Sam Spade. Ricardo Cortez plays him as such a self-serving, grinning jackass. I'm not sure how much I can get away with in terms of language before the TCM censors block me out, but lets just say I found his smarmy grin to be incredibly annoying. And when he goes to the prison at the end, to basically gloat to the woman who I believe does love him that he got a promotion by turning her in, and then smiles that ****-eating grin at her. I just wanted to punch him.

 

I agree with you.   Bogart's Spade was a hard man but he wasn't proud of the fact he had to send Brigit up the river.   Cortez's Spade is gloating.     His smarmy gin is very annoying. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert Mitchum's The Big Sleep is not near as good a Bogart's.  However, Mitchum's Farewell My Lovely is far better than Murder My Sweet.  Interesting to me is that The Falcon Takes Over with George Sanders was based on Raymond Chandler's Farewell My Lovely.  Of course, it's only about 60 mins. long and is a Falcon movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God no, the 1964 version of the Killers looses all the ominousness without the Chiaroscuro lighting.

 

But don't you think there's a different kind of ominousness and foreboding when such horrible things can happen out in the daylight? To me that's part of the movie's impact: horrible things don't just happen in shadow and down dark alleys--they can happen on a neatly mowed, emerald-green lawn in suburbia.

 

I mean, I'm definitely in the camp that prefers the mood and atmosphere of the 40s version, but I think that the later version has a different kind of nefariousness and impact.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But don't you think there's a different kind of ominousness and foreboding when such horrible things can happen out in the daylight? To me that's part of the movie's impact: horrible things don't just happen in shadow and down dark alleys--they can happen on a neatly mowed, emerald-green lawn in suburbia.

 

I mean, I'm definitely in the camp that prefers the mood and atmosphere of the 40s version, but I think that the later version has a different kind of nefariousness and impact.

No for me it just feels like a cheap made for TV film with bland cinematography.  If it didn't have Ronald Regan, Lee Marvin, and Angie Dickinson in it, it would probably be forgotten.

 

But don't you think there's a different kind of ominousness and foreboding when such horrible things can happen out in the daylight?

 

Hell yes, check out Neo Noir's, Kill Me Again, Mulholland Falls, Darker Than Amber, Marlowe, True Romance, The Wrong Man (1993), Bring Me The Head of Alfredo Garcia, Delusion, Romeo Is Bleeding. Or Classic Noirs, Roadblock, The Hitch-Hiker, Highway Dragnet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No for me it just feels like a cheap made for TV film with bland cinematography.  If it didn't have Ronald Regan, Lee Marvin, and Angie Dickinson in it, it would probably be forgotten.

 

But it does have them, plus John Cassavetes and great supporting players like Norman Fell and Claude Akins. The plot and dialogue are still solid, and where William Conrad was absolutely terrifying, Marvin and Gallagher were twisted. I love the 1964 movie on a totally different level; the two versions are as different as (pun intended) night and day despite the same source material.

 

But yes, the cinematography in the original is exquisite, where the later version, made for TV, looks like it had a budget of $100 for set design (and the racing sequences are laughable).

 

Lee Marvin's last words to Angie Dickinson are classic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...