MovieChat Forums > Come Out and Play (2013) Discussion > please watch the original one

please watch the original one


after this movie come out and when I know this movie is a remake, I quickly watch the original one first. Yeah, the original one is great, kind of slow movie but not in slow pacing. Got a good amount of tension and mystery that can keep you at the edge of your seat. This one? I just watch this and its so disappointing. Why? Because its just a copy paste, they use the exactly same shot for every scene, they make it too fast until it became less surprise. Bad remake ever.Just watch the original one (1976).

reply

Had no clue it was a remake. It's definitely shot for shot just going by the trailer. Down to the kids expressions/actions.



Rest in Peace Jim Kelly, you will be missed.

reply

So, if this is a one to one remake, what makes the original better ? I mean having seen this film, the original can only be better.

This film had bad camera work, horrible characters / actors, not even enough gore to make you sit on the edge of the seat. It was very disappointing.

reply

why must there be any gore???






http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

reply

why must there be any gore???






http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

reply

I found this film horrible, there is no suspense whatsoever, so some gore effects would have made a change - as, obviously, the kids are brutal killers. So, one of the more shocking scenes is, when this little boy gets shot or the kids kill the old man.

Of course, a film does not need gore, if the story was told differently, if you could feel the threat and if, generally, there was more suspense. So I was wondering, whether the original got that right, underlying suspense, not necessarily more blood and gore. I am basically of the opinion that a quiet film with underlying threats and suspense could have a much better horror effect on the viewer than just a gore fest. But this film just got it wrong (FOR ME) as the actors were horrible, the characters acted dumb, the camera work made me dizzy and no suspense was built up and/or I just didn't care what happened to the two adults, because they were just plain stupid, in particular the husband. So, if this film had some gore scenes, it might have at least some shocking scenes.

reply

So, if this is a one to one remake, what makes the original better ?


Psycho.

Seize the moment, 'cause tomorrow you might be dead.

reply

i thought it was a pretty good remake. sure, it's almost shot-for-shot-remake, a modern update of the classic so to speak, therefore not very thrilling if you know the story already. nevertheless it was done pretty well. digging the sound design in particular. most remakes simplify the original story too much, or add some cheesy elements.

reply

IMHO all remakes suck. 'Nuff said. Yes I'm totally biased against remakes because they take a good (or bad) movie and make it worse. Two classic horror movies come to mind. The remakes of The Amityville Horror and The Toolbox Murders were absolute garbage. Robocop? My God have they ever butchered that movie. The Hills Have Eyes. I *love* the original and was very disappointed with the remake. I can go on but you get the idea.

This piece of garbage was a cut and paste job like someone mentioned but it lacked the tension and atmosphere of the original.

My rant is done. I shall crawl back under my rock and reminisce about the good old days. Have a nice day.

Long live the 70's!

reply

They really should have tried to shake things up a bit. Give us a different plot structure or a new ending or SOMETHING. What little changes they did employ only made the film more unbelievable and removed the context and subtext of the '76 original. I suppose I'm fine with the excision of the political commentary intended in the original for a plot that is more straightforward horror. But I'm not fine with the way that pivotal scenes are made laughable by the changes (e.g. the ending).

reply

I agree. The remake was okay but if you've seen the original, there is really no reason to watch it. There were some things I really missed from the original such as the little featurette at the beginning talking about all the children who have died because of wars and famine. It really drives the point of the film home (which is one of the most important parts of the film) which is that adults have had power for so many years and completely messed them up, so the kids murdered all the adults and took control themselves. This film got rid of that subtext and made it just another killer kids' horror movie. Also the scene where they made a piñata out of the old man was one of my favorite parts of the original which I missed in this movie. Overall, I liked the original overall. This was okay but it wasn't as good.

Burn, witch! Burn, witch! Burn! Burn! Burn!

reply

Hello fluffset,
what's the exact title of the original? It is not mentioned in any post of the whole thread, as far as I can see... (but feel free to correct me in case I overlooked something ;-)
EDIT: If 1976 is the year, then you must mean Quien puede matar a un nino, I guess...
Kind regards
sprendlinger

reply

yes, that one. Who Can Kill a Child? (1976) or Quién puede matar a un niño? (original title).

THRILLER IS MY FOOD!

reply

Hello fluffset,
Good Morning from Germany :-)
Thank you for the info!
When I have the choice between original and remake(s), I tend to prefer the original, too. Maybe I'm missing some good remakes, in a few cases; but there are just too many BAD 2nd (3rd, 4th,...) versions around!
Kind regards
sprendlinger

reply

your welcome, I think you are the 1st imdb replier in my life who talk with such good manner. Its not like everyone have been rude to me, its kind of my fault too. By the way, enjoy the original movie, its really good though. LONG LIVE JERMAN!

THRILLER IS MY FOOD!

reply