Ash Tackles: Remakes

One topic that always seems to divide horror fans is the idea of remakes. It usually sparks a debate (that doesn't always end pretty).  Fans will go into their respective camps: one with those who think they are bastardizing franchises they hold dear and the other with those who think they are necessary to bring the films to a new generation of viewers.  Then you have those who just see the movies as innocuous.

Personally, I have a bag of mixed feelings when it comes to remakes.

 

 
When well done, I am all for them.  If they can take the original and are able to do something unique with it for a remake, it gets a pass from me.  John Carpenter's The Thing (1982), David Cronenberg's The Fly (1986), and Tom Savini's Night of the Living Dead (1990) are all perfect examples of remakes done properly.  Each movie felt like a love letter to its counterpart and were artistic and technical leaps beyond the originals they were based on.  While I can watch and admire the originals, I can also watch their remakes and be amazed by them too.

Where I start to worry is when a remake comes out and it feels like a blatant cash grab. When you take a franchise that is well established and has big name value and then you make a remake simply to cash in on that, the quality of the film, as a whole, suffers.  Friday the 13th (2009), Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), and most recently, Poltergeist (2015), were all glaring in their attempt to make a quick buck.  To me all these movies did little to bring anything new to the story and barely even tried to put themselves on par with the movies that they are based on. They were less of a love letter and more of the studios taking a formula that worked before and trying to cash in on people's nostalgia without requiring much creative effort on the filmmakers part.

 

Now I've heard arguments from all sides: "Remakes do nothing to erase your movies, just be happy with the movies you have" and "these remakes will help the younger generation get into our beloved classics".

Okay let me put these two arguments together:

Yes, I still have the movies I love but what I am concerned with is the future generation of potential horror fans getting substandard movies.  Also, these remakes might be the first movie they see, and if they don't like the movie it can, in a sense, poison the proverbial well; tarnishing their viewpoint on the franchise from there on out.  Their initial experience can be lackluster enough that they won't even bother to watch the older film or films, thus cheating them out of what might be an experience that we consider totally worthwhile.  I don't think kids need films of their generation in order for them to enjoy them. Growing up in the '80s, I watched tons of classic monster movies and creature features from the '30s - '70s.  Just because they were made "before my time" didn't mean I enjoyed them any less.  I never once thought "Psh, Vincent Price isn't taking a selfie in this scene, this movie sucks!"

One final thought: no American remakes of foreign horror films.  I don't think I've seen one yet that outshines the original (Lookin' at you, Quarantine).  American remakes of foreign horror films are made because the studio assumes horror fans are too stupid or lazy to sit through a movie full of subtitles or foreign cultural customs.  By changing those things they ruin a winning combination that made the movie popular enough to want to remake in the first place.

Just to point it out, I am not trying to trash remakes in general. I think if they are done right they can definitely enhance a franchise and add another layer to the story.  Unfortunately, more often than not, most remakes are made with dollar signs in their eyes.