What was the point? I understand that there is sound in this verson, but is that a reason to remake the original? We could add sound to all sorts of silent film. We could also add 3D, more violence, gratuatice nudity, more explosions, CGI raptors.... but why? Seems to me that if you are going to remake a film you must think you can really add something artisticly, but I think I am missing it on this one. Can anyone help?
shareI'm afraid I don't understand, either. Just because David Lee Fisher *could* remake Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari doesn't mean he should have. The original is much better. I think the fact that it was silent added to its beauty and creepiness, and one disadvantage to having sound in the remake is we could hear how terrible the new actors were.
May The Force be with you
I didn't think much was added either. And the acting was quite appalling, for the most part. Maybe someone could have done it better, though--I doubt any remake really could surpass the original in quality or creepy beauty, but it's possible that one could be a good film in its own right. Depending on the nature of said hypothetical remake, sound could prove to be a useful addition.
shareI enjoyed it. I'm sure there's a lot of folks out there (maybe not on this board though) who don't watch movies from the 1920s but will watch movies from the two-thousandzies (as Rachel Maddow calls it).
I'm one of those folks. And I thought this movie was pretty cool, indeed.
I like how people try to say that the acting is bad; have you even SEEN the original film??! These modern actors were EMULATING them and their mannerisms.
Silence adds nothing to a film. It doesn't do squat to the expression of the film so you are jumping through hoops to try and say that having something missing actually ADDS to the experience. You want a silent film? Hit the mute button and watch it with subtitles. Good game.