Platinum Dunes


Why does Platinum Dunes get so much unwarranted hate? The films they made after the series were basically dead were really bad and not dark or scary at all. They made Leatherface evil and scary again. They made Jason a threat and relentless again. They made Freddy dark and twisted again. Why all the hate? Let's see Jason X is a parody and totally disrespected the character, even though it was fun. Freddys Dead was stupid and a pure mockery. And Chainsaw 4, is so bad it's good. I just wish Platinum Dunes would get some credit where credits due.

reply

Make all the sequels you want and you won't get dumped on, but don't, I repeat, DON'T remake great classic horror films that are fine just the way they are. It devalues and disrespects the original film just to cash in on a built in audience. That is why I despise Platinum Dunes, and I always will. All they needed for this movie was a subtitle and I would have given it a chance. There should only be one movie titled "A Nightmare on Elm Street".

reply

The new Chainsaw film was great, and did not disrespect the series at all. Part 4 did that. And Jason X was horrendous, at least the remake was pretty good. So should they not make more Batman movies either? They dont change the originals at all.

reply

I mentioned in my first post that I don't give a crap about sequels. They are mostly horrible, and everyone expects them to be. They are lazy attempts to cash in as well, but they are sequels, not remakes of classic films.

Remakes devalue the originals. Simple as that. It's lazy. It's a cash grab. It's an insult to the original films, like saying "your movie isn't good enough, so we're going to make it over again". Now, don't get me wrong, a few remakes have surpassed original films, but it's extremely rare, and once again, with anything, it's all pretty subjective. I fall on the side of "*beep* remakes".

None of the Batman films were remakes. Different titles. Same characters in completely different plotlines. A remake takes the exact title, plot, with all of the best remembered key scenes, and just "does them over." I can even justify this to some extent...if they simply add a subtitle so the original film can stand alone.

Characters like Freddy, Dracula, Batman, etc...they will always be in movies, and that is fine, but by constantly doing the same thing over and over, it just waters everything down and ruins what everyone liked about the characters in the first place.

We are living in the time of unoriginality, and it's a shame. Figured it would die out soon, but people will always be looking for the quickest way to make some cash, and the sheep keep coming to the slaughter, so I'm sure we will see remakes of all the classic horror movies left unscathed, and all timeless classic movies in general, for a long time to come. And I'll be pissed at every one of them.

reply

i agree with you, platinum dunes is ok. for what it is, they do ok work. while i absolutely hate this particular movie i thought the texas chainsaw remake from 2003 was amazing. the best since the original in my opinion. i also dont mind friday the 13th 2009, it was the best since the 80s at least. also i liked amityville horror 2005.

nightmare on elm street however, did not work for me. and its simply because freddy krueger is a character that belongs to robert englund. i just couldnt get into this with someone else in the role.

all that said, the worst remake of all for me has been the rob zombie halloweens which platinum dunes had nothing to do with.

reply

Looking back on them, they were a God send.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003 & 2006), Friday the 13th (2009) and A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) are all decent.

- Those TCM films are very easily argued the best since the original.
- The F13 film was something of a return to form, it was definitely superior to Jason Takes Manhattan, Jason Goes To Hell & Jason X. It can also compare quite favorably to the original, 5, 6 and 7.
- The NOES film was better than 2, 5, 6 and maybe even 7.

reply