Has Hollywood ever remade a sh!tty movie into a good one?

ben hur (1959) is a remake.

Which brings us to the question I made in my previous post.

Can we really call multiple adaptations of the same source material "remakes"?
 
Are you saying the remakes of Planet of the Apes are better than the original?
 
I Spit on Your Grave remake was better than the original.
The Hills Have Eyes remake was better than original.
The American version of The Grudge & The Ring was better than Japanese version.

Night of the Living Dead & Dawn of the Dead remakes were more fun than the originals.
Bram Stoker's Dracula was better than anything that came before it.

The remakes of 2000 Maniacs & The Wizard of Gore were way better than the originals.
 
Last edited:
the new Dawn of the Dead is EXPONENTIALLY better than the Romero original
have no clue what people are on there
 
seriously tho, I mentioned it, but I don't think a lot of people know there was a Scott Glenn version of Man on Fire from the 80s, virtually the same movie just set in Italy not Mexico as the later, better Denzel one
 
This a real slip from you Anung;


It's InFernal affairs, it's Chinese, and it's NOT bettered by The departed.


You shouldn't really be including a film if you've not actually seen the original.
I do what I want :cool:
 
I wouldn't call either shitty, but what is yalls opinion on Manhunter vs Red Dragon?
 
Dawn of the Dead (2004) is way better than the original.

glove-slap-gif-1.gif


Romero’s is superior.

Although, the remake is one of the rare times where I liked the remake.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't How Stella Got Her Grove Back a remake? Amazing movie btw.
 
  1. Invasion of the Body Snatchers w Donald Sutherland > than the originals AND it’s future remakes.
 
The Star Wars Remastered Movies are better than the Unalteder verisons.
 
Trolliest post that ever trolled.



Nope..




Well I'm thinking maybe a director liked a concept but not the execution. For example District 9 imo is a really interesting concept but I didn't like the direction they went with it. Not saying its a bad movie but I think it could have been much much better




...this one is^
 
Not sure how literal you want to get with remake, but Nolan's Batman films were better than previous incarnations.


That would only count if there was no Tim Burton Batman movies. 1989 Batman doesn't qualify as a shitty movie.
 
the new Dawn of the Dead is EXPONENTIALLY better than the Romero original
have no clue what people are on there

Dawn of the Dead is not considered a shitty movie in it's genre. This sounds like a classic case of someone born way after a movie was made, going back and watching it and not being impressed. A kid today might say Pacman or Super Mario Bros 3 was a shitty game as well. This discussion is for movies that actually sucked when they came out. Its not relevant if you think the new version is better. There might be a Dawn of the Dead remake in 50 years from now that much better than the 2004 version....that doesn't make the 2004 version shitty.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top