Movie Discussion Point 2
So remakes are like taxes, man-made, annoying as fuck, and inevitable, and most people complain about them. Of course, taxes serve many uses and remakes don't, so the comparison breaks down really quickly, but nonetheless, if there's a movie you really love, chances are it will be remade eventually. Impossible, you think? Well I don't know if it's a stated law yet, but the longer movies are still being made, the chances of any title being remade goes to 1:1.
Now, recently I learned that Quarantine is actually a remake of [Rec], and The Strangers a remake of Them. A lot of remakes are coming out, now, that do not share titles with the original source. My first impression was, "Great! Then they can stand alone/on their own as a movie without having to be referred (and thus compared) to the original!" But then I thought about it, and the one thing remakes do tend to offer is the opportunity for their original sources to come into mainstream attention. Ringu, anyone?
Now Quentin Tarantino is coming out with Inglourious Basterds. YES, sic. As in, Inglorious Bastards, but spelled funny. People give Tarantino a lot of crap for ripping off other movies all the time, but now that he makes a direct remake, he changes the spelling. Does he want clerks like me to look up "Inglorious Bastards" for people, thus leading them to the original, or does he really want to set his movie apart in some ironic way?
So how 'bout it, people: Would you prefer the remake keep the title of the original, or is it better off just using a unique title to separate the two movies from each other?
--PolarisDiB
Now, recently I learned that Quarantine is actually a remake of [Rec], and The Strangers a remake of Them. A lot of remakes are coming out, now, that do not share titles with the original source. My first impression was, "Great! Then they can stand alone/on their own as a movie without having to be referred (and thus compared) to the original!" But then I thought about it, and the one thing remakes do tend to offer is the opportunity for their original sources to come into mainstream attention. Ringu, anyone?
Now Quentin Tarantino is coming out with Inglourious Basterds. YES, sic. As in, Inglorious Bastards, but spelled funny. People give Tarantino a lot of crap for ripping off other movies all the time, but now that he makes a direct remake, he changes the spelling. Does he want clerks like me to look up "Inglorious Bastards" for people, thus leading them to the original, or does he really want to set his movie apart in some ironic way?
So how 'bout it, people: Would you prefer the remake keep the title of the original, or is it better off just using a unique title to separate the two movies from each other?
--PolarisDiB