ITT: Remakes better than the original

ITT: Remakes better than the original

Nice try

ITT: Shit bait

fuck off rob

>do a remake of Halloween
>put it in theatres during the Summer

They couldn't even get the release date right, much less anything else.

>MUH ABUSIVE DAD
>MUH STRIPPER MOM
>MUH DEAD ANIMAL COLLECTION

Rob Zombie is edgy enough to make a teenager blush.

The thing by carpenter

Friday the 13
Predators (2010)

...

I'm sure you meant nightmare on elm st

halloween 2

The only true one so far.

yes
NO
yes

...

...

...

...

ITT plebs

...

RUNNING ZOMBIES ARE DUMB AND GAY

The only correct posts in this garbage thread.
Rob Zombie's Halloween is an edgy mess that doesn't understand what made the original a great film.
The Friday the 13th remake isn't terrible but it lacked the cheesy charm of the original. Predators isn't a remake and it's shit compared to The Predator.
Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead is a fun action flick but it's nowhere near as good as the original.
Congratulations on making the dumbest post in this thread. The original The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a fucking masterpiece, the remake is a generic slasher that lacks the unsettling atmosphere that the original has.
Peter Jackson's King Kong is good but the original is better.

t.Grandi

I watched the original Halloween for the first time 2 days ago and I honestly don't understand the praise it gets. Maybe it was scary at the time but it just doesn't hold up.

...

>80s The Thing
>80s The Blob
>80s The Fly
>the 2008 Day of the Dead movie

literally these and only these

Nah. I love this movie, true zombie kino, but you can't compare it to the '78 A E S T H E T I C S plus Goblin + Argento of the first film.

me too, i watched it a few days ago
some things were good others were meh

the music was good, but it felt out of place mostly every time
>mysterious evil hand appears on screen
>super loud music starts playing

sometimes less is more, i'd be more spooked without the music.

I thought Night of the Living Dead '90 was pretty good. A lot better than some of the other attempts at remaking it like the godawful 3D one.

It got praise and continues to get praise because it does a great job of building atmosphere and suspense. It's a fantastic slow-burn horror film that doesn't over-rely on jump scares or gore.
>but it felt out of place mostly every time
I disagree. I think the music perfectly fits.

>>the 2008 Day of the Dead movie
What the fuck? That shit was hilariously awful. It doesn't even come close to the original film.

I think he meant to refer to the 2004 Dawn of the Dead

Nice bait, OP

I'd have to go with Carpenter's The Thing and Snyder's Dawn of the Dead tho

lolno

the original was garbage
>terrible pacing
>easy to hate characters
by the time It was over I wanted them all dead because of how annoying and dumb they are

sure the new one is shit but it was infinitely better because it had the fat guy from rome as that radio host

I'm never listening to Sup Forums again

>easy to hate characters
Nope, the only dislikable character was the woman. Even flyboy became likeable by the third act

You're slacking, Sup Forums.

>matt damon

Dropped. I'm boycotting all his films

Then you're missing out, fampai. The original True Grit was a cheesefest with terrible acting. The 2010 version is a masterpiece.

only correct answer so far

Snyder actually made a good movie once, imagine that

Both are great.

>The original The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a fucking masterpiece, the remake is a generic slasher that lacks the unsettling atmosphere that the original has.
Fucking thank you.
The original Texas Chain Saw Massacre has no love on this board and I have no clue why.

>only correct answer so far
Did you not see the posts that mention John Carpenter's The Thing, David Cronenberg's The Fly, Brian De Palma's Scarface and Joel & Ethan Coen's True Grit?

Are you fucking serious.
The original 1978 Dawn of the Dead is miles ahead of the Zack Snyder remake.
NOTLD '90 doesn't get nearly enough love, it pretty much fixes the final act of the movie.

The original gets lots of love here, maybe not in this thread but overall

Savini's Night of the Living Dead is better than the original. I actually didn't mind the broad being more than a whiny bitch, but I wish they had kept the racial overtones with the final sequence.

Senpai, that poster didn't mention Dawn of the Dead. He mentioned Day of the Dead. You're right about Romero's original being better than Snyder's remake though.

The only things the 1968 original has over the 1990 remake are the (unintentional?) racial themes and the fact that it was really the first of its kind.
That being said I'm still a huge of the movie. I just think Savini's version is a perfect example of how to do a remake. More blood, more gore, better acting, and an entire third act that turns the movie on its head.

>(unintentional?) racial themes
I haven't researched this but I think it's safe to assume the themes are completely intentional. All of Romero's zombie films are social commentary.

I like both movies very much but I think I like the 90 version a little more simply because it was the first zombie related thing I ever saw.

Oh, I misread that post. Everyone is posting about the Dawn remake anyways.
But it doesn't really matter, because the 1985 version of Day of the Dead is still better than the remake as well.
>based Joe Pilato as Captain Rhodes
>bleak tone
>80s as fuck synth score
>Doctor Logan
>Bub getting his revenge
>no vegetarian zombies
It actually had a good amount of influence on the Resident Evil movies, too (not saying they're good). Like that scene in the third movie where they try to train a zombie to be smart, it's clearly inspired by Day. Not the mention the newspaper headlines in the movie before it.

I said unintentional because Romero actually stated that Ben wasn't even written as a black man. He just cast Duane Jones because he was apparently one of the best actors he knew.
Of course, he could have also inserted some racial overtones when he was shooting the movie, but at the very start it wasn't something he set out to do.

>terrible pacing
The pacing is fine. It's an extremely bleak slow-burn movie that's all about the characters being unable to cope with each other in the zombie apocalypse. It's not supposed to be fast-paced action schlock.
>easy to hate characters
Dr. Logan, Bub and other characters were based. Rhodes was a fucking despicable asshole but that makes his death extremely satisfying.

Also, VEGETARIAN ZOMBIES are inexcusable and make the remake objectively worse than the original.

This

Not a remake

Probably. It's still better.

>hey, guys
yeah rob
>you know that horror movie that goes out of its way to dehumanize its villain?
mhm
>his face is only ever shown twice, he never displays any emotion, he is constantly referred to as nothing but pure evil, and he has no clear motives
yep
>well, I have an idea for a remake

1/10 bait, OP. Made me reply.

On the making of the 90s remake, Savini says it was completely unintentional.
He says that Romero was driving on his way to drop off the first cut and he heard the news of Martin Luther King Jr's assassination, only then realizing it was going to be considered a "black movie."
He also said that the black actor was the only one who was uncomfortable with having a black actor in a lead role.

It gets honorable mention anyway.

well i don't like running zombies but still yes
90's night was great much better than the original