I found the original The Hills Have Eyes genuinely shocking and disturbing -- different from frightening in my opinion. With the remake I got the extended DVD version, which went on and on and was probably a worse cut than the theatrical release which I haven't seen. I think the remake lost some of the intensity of the original -- didn't they take out the cannibalism completely, for example?
And there was a slight bit of cannibilism suggested in it, like when that big head guy says 'It's breakfast time' and the part where the long haired one that looks like a homeless person is eating the mothers innards. Ha
i'd like to see the original 'crazies' before i see the remake. i much prefer originals to remakes, although there are some remakes i like.
the wolf man remake i didn't mind. i also liked the day the earth stood still. the last man on earth remakes are ok i guess. i prefer i am legend to the omega man. night, dawn and day of the dead i like very much. the texas chain saw massacre i liked as well. oh yeah, can't forget the halloween remakes. those i love 'cause it's rob zombie and his shit is fucked. lmao!
dang, there's alot or remakes in here lol! wth man.
70s remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers was really good. 80s remake of The Thing likewise. I also really liked the 00s remake of The House on Haunted Hill, though it was more fun than horror in some ways.
i'm not a fan of tom cruise, but i really did enjoy the war of the worlds remake...mostly because of young dakota fanning. lol! i was totally blowed away by her acting. i think she much better then...him.
the dracula remake was alright too, but i much prefer the bela lugosi version then the gary oldman one.
Obviously The Thing and The Fly were amazing, but I also enjoyed the Hills Have Eyes remake, and even though I might be shot for typing this, I very much enjoyed The Ring, there I said it. Also the My Bloody Valentine remake was quite fun.
Most horror remakes are bad...bacause they are more about making money than making a difference. It's easier to make money of a bad movie with a famous name than a no-name wannabe horror film. Especially Last house on the left. That made me sick how bad it was...And to anwser the question....The Thing...cause it was made when filmmakers still had som respect for the original.
I grew up watching the 1990 version of "Night Of The Living Dead", and it's always been a favorite of mine. What makes it a good remake is that it stayed pretty true to the original, with the biggest difference being better production values. From black and white to color, with better effects - that was a pretty good leap.
Nowadays, horror films are being remade and gayed up for no apparent reason. "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" did not need to be remade, because in no way did they make an advancement on the original. Half the remakes today are gayed up with nu-metal soundtracks and other corny modern touches.