This film cannot compare to the original film of 1974 with Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw. It was filled with foul language and totally devoid of any class on the part of anyone! What is it with the nitwits who engage in remakes only to make a mess of them? Why don't they just play tiddlywinks and leave us alone with their overpriced remakes such as this one?
sharei first saw the original a few days ago and really liked it. then saw the remake was on tv yesterday and thought it would probably be bad, i'm not really drawn to denzel washington tbh, but nothing else worth watching was on, so i put it on.
i actually liked it. they strayed from the original enough for me for it to be more of a tribute to it rather than an exact copy - which it didnt need imho, when a film is done right the first time, why bother remaking?
both films are great in my opinion - and this comes from a purist!
The charactor of John Travolta was way too much over the top compared to Robert Shaw's cold charactor.
Plus using Denzel's charactor to chase down the bad guy is riduculous considering he was a regular office worker. How many ordinary men would chase and kill a dangerous psychopath? Only in the movies you say.
Remember Mathau was a cop in the movie and had the right to chase the crook.
Boab The Fly tends to agree with the OP. Thus fillum us bad remake o' a greet classic frum thay 70s likes. Shouldnae cast Dancing Johnny and Malcolm x in these roles. It whiled away an hour or so though but ah prefer thay original ye ken whit ah'm sayin'?
While the chief puts sunshine on Leith I'll thank him for his work & your birth & my birth
It was a good remake.Not all films have to be a classic.It gave me lots of entertainment.
shareI found the directing to be horrible. It reminded me of a made for TV movie. Guess what? The director still makes TV movies.
ROTA Top Foreign Language Films List: http://www.imdb.com/list/qQvbXmXhhCU/
Obviously remakes are worse than their original fore bearers. I can't think of any remake that does the original justice
My Voting history is secret;)
Well, John Huston's Maltese Falcon is a remake. So is the Wizard of Oz that we all know. Given some time, I'm sure i could think of others.
But, this one is worse, than the original, for sure.
Zoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Zoom. Unzoom. Tony Scott.
shareIt is not a remake.
Both (or all 3, or even more) movies are based on the same source material, a book by John Godey.
As far as language goes, the 1974 original was not exactly clean, either. That being said, I agree with you 100%. What is the point of remaking something that was damn near perfect the first time around? I saw the original on TCM for the first time in more than thirty years the other night and I was overjoyed to see how well it has held up; after close to forty years, it is still an exciting, often funny, and gripping thrill ride of a movie that is a joy to watch no matter how many times you see it. I have not seen the remake, and I do not intend to.
Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
><
You sure hit a bullseye with your comments! I sure agree! I saw the original years ago....enjoyed it. Just last night, I treated my boys to a viewing of the original....a hit!
I advised them not to watch the horrible remake. So much profanity and just totally uninteresting. No class.
I am not a fan of remakes in general, but if a filmmaker is trying to improve on something that didn't work so well the first time, I can at least understand the concept. But to take a movie that was damn near perfect the first time around and remake it; what's the point? You can't improve on perfection. Gus Van Sant learned that lesson for sure with his disastrous carbon copy of PSYCHO, and yet the remakes keep coming, like Jonathan Demme's THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, which I will not see because Frankenheimer's original was perfect and complete and no way anyone could improve on it.
Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
><
Just finished watching the original on TV. It's some kind of a sign that you just don't see the new version around.
And, I agree, there are all kinds of movies that just missed the mark, that in hindsight should have done this or that, or were victims of bad timing. Why not remake them?
Or, redo old stuff: there's a ton of black-and-white films (NO - NOT 'CASABLANCA')that were B-movies in their day, or popular but now outdated.
Remake and update them!
All those old gangster movies (aside from the classics) or the 'Dead End Kids', that no-one sees any more because no channel except Turner Classics shows them, and then only once in a blue moon.
All those old romantic comedies, update them with the latest starlets. Heck, 'Pretty Woman' is exactly that, only she's a hooker instead of the original version, who would have been a secretary or a shop-clerk.
'My Best Friend's Wedding' is any one of those movies about a sweet ingénue and her fiancé, and the scheming bitch who tries (unsuccessfully) to break them up. Told,of course, from the POV of the scheming bitch.
'Pelham 1,2,3,' did not need remaking.
Sure, the original film wasn't racist at all. Compared to the remake the original was far worse in the foul language department.
I liked the original and I also liked the re-imagining of it as well. It was by far not a remake. If it was a remake it would have had the same humor as the original.
I still think the original Oceans 11 is still my fave caper movie.
Watching this is very, very painful.
It's my house, and I live here.