Take two: movies and their recreations
May 11, 2016
Countless of movie-remakes have been made throughout the years, ranging from King Kong, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and- more recently- Grease. Do you ever wonder, though, why that is? Why spend thousands to a million dollars to just make a movie that has already been made? I, personally, do not see the point in rehashing movies.
Let me start off by saying that I am not a movie fanatic like some. So maybe that makes my opinion disconnected, or maybe it makes me little biased.
My whole stance is that the recycling of movies is usually a waste of money; they usually turn out to be a disappointment compared to the original.
Everyone knows that the original is often better. That’s how it is with books and that’s how it is with movies; the book is almost always better than the movie. Movies tend to leave out important sections, or change them so drastically that they aren’t the same as the book. It seems to be the exact same way with movie recreations. The reboot is often cheesy, and things that were important in the original seem to be left out, which in return, seems to ruin the movie all together. Fans of the original go to see the recycled movie, and most walk out of the theatre disappointed, and wishing they had never seen the modern version.
Maybe I just don’t watch enough movies, or I am watching the wrong films. Maybe my whole opinion is asinine and doesn’t make sense to actual movie fanatics. But based on all of the films that I have seen, old films turned into modern movies are the worst movies made.