Remake Mistake

Why in the name of all that is good and just must we be flooded with movie remakes? Are producers so risk averse they can not try anything new? Or is Hollywood so bereft of ideas they must go back to the archives to find "new" ideas for movies, that they will only succeed in crapping up?

The latest abomination to hit the screen is "Death Race" which opened last weekend, which is a remake of the 1975 cult classic "Death Race 2000" which stared Sylvester Stallone and David Caradine. From the previews, the remake seems to follow the time honored tradition of f-ing up the premise of the original. The 2008 version has prisoners racing for their freedom, which actually was the premise of the 1987 Arnold Schwarzenegger movie the "Running Man" sans cars. The original Death Race 2000 featured drivers who were national heroes who ran over people for sport. The tag line for the movie was "In The Year 2000 Hit And Run Driving Is No Longer A Felony. It's The National Sport!"

Did I love the original that much that I have to complain about the remake? No. It was campy cult movie fun. A statement was made but it wasn't meant to be taken seriously. Not like movies today which must have a "moral message" in order to be made. This is a problem with all TV and popular entertainment today. They all have to have a message. Only "Seinfeld" remained immune. It had no message and no point, except to entertain, which was part of its charm.

In my book, there are only three situations where it is acceptable to remake a movie:

1. The original was in another language:
Recently, I watched the original "Breathless" (aka A bout de souffle), the 1959 French classic. It was a good movie, but subtitles and all the French references limited its appeal in other markets. The remake was in English with Richard Gere as the star. It actually wasn't that bad (the last half was great!). It also expanded the originals appeal far beyond what it could have achieved on its own.

2. The original was really, REALLY, bad:
In 1941, Humphrey Bogart stared in the "Maltese Falcon." It was a landmark hit. It was also the third attempt at making the movie. The first release was in 1931; the word most commonly associated with it is "regrettable." One other attempt to make it in the ensuing years, which was never completed. When John Huston took over the third version, with Bogart, the advice he was given was don't change a word of the original story. He didn't and it was a huge success for him, Bogart, the studio, and movie fans.

3. The original was based on another source, that was not a movie (e.g. book, short story, real life events):
This is a more of a justification rather than a real reason. I was trying to figure out how I could allow for remakes of the Batman movies, and this seemed like a safe bet. It also allows for multiple remakes of Shakespearean plays, too.

When is it not permissible to remake a movie:

1. Cult Classics:
This seems to be a favorite target of producers. It is like they are trying to atone for past sins. Cult classics should not be taken seriously; they were statement movies with satire, designed to poke an extreme reaction, but nobody took them at face value. The producers of "Death Race 2000" never really suggested that everyone should really run over geriatrics in front of a nursing home for sport, even though that is what they did. I haven't seen the new Death Race, but I am sure that the hero Jason Statham was a victim, framed for his the crimes that sent him to prison. Yawn. Who gives a rat-fart.

2. "Epic" movies:
It goes without saying that films that are epic in scope or vision should not be remade. We should not expect to see Brad and Angelina in a remake of "Gone with the Wind." It is for precisely this reason I am so excited to see "Hamlet 2". Of course it shouldn't be made; the premise is so over the top bad that it has to be funny!

3. Signature works:
When an actor is so well known for one role, it should never be tampered with, ever. A few years ago, a made for TV version of "Breakfast at Tiffany's" was released, staring Jennifer Love Hewitt in the part of Holly Golightly, the role made famous by Audrey Hepburn. About the only nice thing the critics could say about the movie was that Jennifer Love Hewitt didn't mess it up too badly.

As you guessed, I probably won't go see the new Death Race. I think I already can guess at how the movie goes: Prisoner, wrongly imprisoned, has one chance for freedom. Must race and kill to escape. Has moral problems with killing. His example influences others. He focuses his efforts on clearing his name, which puts him into conflict with the Warden who created the race. Because he is good and just, he will triumph with his morals intact. Yawn.

Me, I think I will catch Hamlet 2 and maybe rent the original.