Bad Movies Remakes: Why Hollywood Should Do This

Here’s a breakdown of‌ the provided text, focusing on its main points and arguments:

Core⁢ argument:

The author ⁢is exploring ‌ why Hollywood remakes⁢ certain movies and why they frequently enough avoid remaking others. The central idea is that the most ‍engaging remakes aren’t ⁢simply about “improving” flawed classics, but about directors⁤ engaging with the original material in a meaningful way – either to ⁢preserve its spirit (like Edgar⁣ Wright potentially would with “The Running Man”) or to genuinely evolve it (like Hitchcock with “The Man Who Knew Too Much”). ‌ The author suggests that truly bold remakes,ones that offer a strong sociopolitical commentary or a unique artistic vision,are increasingly rare in modern Hollywood.

Key Points⁤ & supporting arguments:

*‌ ‌ Contrast with ⁤Modern Remakes: The author begins ‍by ‌contrasting the potential for a strong⁤ remake⁢ of “The Running Man” ‍(directed⁤ by Edgar Wright) with the generally lackluster updates of ​films like “Robocop,” “Point Break,” ⁣and “The Day the Earth Stood Still.” These modern remakes are seen as “sanding down the raw edges” of⁣ the originals.
* Sociopolitical Commentary: The author values remakes that‍ retain or amplify ‍the original’s sociopolitical anger. They suggest⁢ that a remake of “The Running‍ Man” could be a pointed ⁢critique of ⁢current power structures (“paramount‌ Skynet” and⁤ “David ⁢ellison’s friends in⁢ our​ government”).
* The‍ “Safe Investment” Problem: ⁤Hollywood tends to remake films that are both famous and flawed, believing they can easily claim⁤ creative genius by “improving” them. Though, there aren’t many of these films⁣ left.
* Successful Remakes as⁤ Evolution: ⁤The author acknowledges that some remakes are successful⁢ because they genuinely evolve the original material. Examples given ‍are David Lowery’s “Pete’s Dragon”, Steven Soderbergh’s “Ocean’s Eleven”, Alfred ‍Hitchcock⁤ revisiting “the Man Who Knew Too Much”, Michael mann evolving “L.A.⁤ Takedown” into “Heat”, and Yasujiro Ozu turning “A Story of Floating Weeds” into just “Floating Weeds”.
* Remakes from Outsiders: The most interesting remakes often come from directors‌ who​ have no prior connection to the source material but bring a fresh⁤ viewpoint. Examples include “Cape Fear”,”The‌ Thing”,and⁢ “Dawn of ‍the Dead”.
* The “Anaconda” Example: The ⁢upcoming “Anaconda” remake is presented⁤ as a potential test case. As the original isn’t considered a masterpiece,⁣ there’s less risk of‌ tarnishing a beloved classic, and⁢ the remake can build⁢ on existing cultural memory.

Overall Tone:

The⁤ tone is critical of ‌modern Hollywood’s tendency towards safe, uninspired remakes. ​The ⁢author clearly values artistic vision and sociopolitical commentary in filmmaking and laments their absence in many contemporary ​remakes. There’s a sense of nostalgia for a‌ time when ‌remakes were more ambitious and creatively daring.

Image Description:

The image is a promotional still for the 1987 film ⁤”Robocop.” It shows a robotic figure, presumably Robocop, in a futuristic setting. The caption ⁢identifies the film and its source. This image serves as a visual example of the⁣ type of classic film the ⁢author is discussing​ in relation to remakes.