Dust Devil Remake


Does anyone think that Dust Devil should be remade because there is some great content on that film and more people I think would like to see this

reply

No, I don't want to see a remake. It would probably star some popular mainstream actress like Jessica Biel or worse yet Paris Hilton as the female lead, with a bland and unthreatening pretty boy type like Ben Affleck as the Dust Devil. Plus the story would be more cut and dried to make it more appealing and accessible to a young mass audience. The harsh violence and nightmarishly bleak atmosphere would be severely toned down as well. I think the original is fine the way it is. A remake would be both ill-advised and unnecessary.

"Warren Oates died for our sins"

reply

[deleted]

I would like to see Richard Stanley remake his own film with a bigger budget so the mass audience might be able to have a glimpse of the content of this film, and if the mass audience do see it then they will probably look up the original film. No changes to the storyline just a revamp of films flair so that many more people will know of this film.

reply

I'd rather see him make a new film altogether ... if people are interested in his work, they'll seek out other films ... those who have already taken an interest in his work will get the opportunity to see something new from him. No one would have asked DaVinci to repaint the Mona Lisa when better quality materials were available to him, so why do the same to a modern day artist?

reply

You make it sound like only Hollywood would consider remaking "Dust Devil." Somehow I doubt it even appears on it radar. If a remake was to be made, I think it would more likely be from the idependent film sector (for better or worse).

However, I still would be surprised if it approaches Stanley's flawed masterpiece.

Knowledge is power, and power corrupts. So study hard. Be evil.

reply

Agreed.

reply

Why do a remake??? It has just been released on DVD and anyone who wants to see it has an opportunity! Oh wait, it was made more than a year ago so it is completely unwatchable.....sorry, I forgot about that ;)

reply

I think that would be the ultimate irony - the film no one wanted to make, was barely completed, now nearly two decades later is remade.

reply

[deleted]

there is no need for a remake. Nothing can really be improved. Mbye a re release would be cool so i could see it on the big screen, but i defiantly do NOT want a remake, its extrememly unessiscary.

reply

It doesn't need a *beep* remake, seldom are remakes any better but usually a whole lot worse. There's no reason to remake this anyway. Like the above poster mentioned, it would be good to see this on the big screen though.

http://www.maverick-media.co.uk

reply

Most remakes may be worse than the original but I fail to see how a remake of this could be any worse than the original as it is that bad.

reply

Dust Devil IS a remake. Stanley originally made a 45 minute version on 16mm some years earlier, the only copy of which was sold by his girlfriend when Stanley was feared dead while in Afghanistan. He remade it in 35mm in a truly torturous shoot. The fact the film got made under thsoe conditions was incredible. The fact he made such a stunning, atmospheric film is a complete miracle.

If it were remade by Hollywood now, it would be watered down into some dull, wholely generic slasher film, stripped of all the deep mythology and stark symbolism that makes Dust Devil so original and memorable in the first place. Big studios don't like original films, especially horror films...they like turgid, predicatble, by-the-numbers, horror films that the audience find familiar. Unfortunately, most of the cinema-going public don't like anything too challenging or thoughtful.

It is to Stanley's enduring credit that Dust Devil is none of these. It is a truly remarkable art/horror film, part Tarkovsky, part Peckinpah, part Leone, but unmistakably Stanley. He's the great lost talent of our times, and the sooner he's back behind the camera the better. The fact he's only been able to direct two features in 17 years is a total crime.

reply

WHY A REMAKE. PEOPLE SHOULD MAKE ORIGINAL FILMS FFS!!!

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

reply


Couldn't agree more Ozwozzle!

One twist might be to do a movie about the making of Dust Devil, as by Stanley's own account in the Dust Devil Diary [I wake up Screaming] there were almost as many strange things happening on set as on film.

Stanley has begun to edge his way back to normal cinema and has one or two films/scripts/etc in the pipeline according to his Myspace blog.

Let's hope they let him loose on something really good.

reply

Why do a remake? I just watched the film today for the first time since 1993 and the movie really holds up and stands the test of time..... MORE ORIGINAL FILMS AND GIVE THE REMAKES A REST!!!!!!!!! IT'S GETTING OUT OF HAND!!!

reply

[deleted]

I agree... The whole remake thing is getting out of hand. And under no circumstances should this movie be remade. It hurt badly enough to see "The Hitcher" and "Dawn of the Dead" remade by filmmakers who obviously missed the point of the original movies... Remaking "Dust Devil" would only add salt to the open wound that is actual filmmaking.

reply

This film should be remade but only by Stanley only as he's the only person who can understand the material.

If you look at Dust Devil it's clear that it is incomplete as a movie. This is due to money being taken away from the production, special effects and stunts being removed. It took Dust Devil from being a horror movie to being an art-house movie.

reply