The remake will never be as good as the original

You might be interested


Reply Attach
  • 4

    I think it has to do more with the message of the film. It still seems to holds the same anticommunist message as the original. The American people have become too passive, I think that is is exactly what's needed to empower them to fight for their freedom against an enemy looking to take it away from them.

    Exactly, we as a nation have been divisive for to long. There is no common ground anymore, everyone is either a right wing repub or bleeding heart demo etc. On the other hand we all hate commies! YAY Unification!
    - Sharpie600rr October 4, 2012, 8:33 am
    Last time it was the Russians. A believable enemy. This Time its North Korea. I have seen state militias that are more formidable than North Korea. For what you just described I think Act of Valor will remind us of that, not this remake.
    - johnecash October 4, 2012, 9:44 am
    Sorry who exactly is destroying your freedom except from yourselves?
    - HippyBoy October 4, 2012, 3:11 pm
    Thanks to the Armed forces no one has destroyed it but just a triclebickle said we fight every day to keep the freedoms we have.
    - johnecash October 4, 2012, 3:23 pm
    It was also the Nicaraguans in the first one. And I agree on the militia statement North Korea is really no threat to us but it still sends the anti-communist message.
    - triclebickle October 5, 2012, 12:48 am
    Or we're they Cuban? I can't remember
    - johnecash October 5, 2012, 10:05 pm
    It was both.
    - triclebickle October 6, 2012, 9:13 pm
  • 3

    Now lets be honest, most remakes of all movies are undoubtedly never as good as the orginals, but I am sure there are exceptions.

    That would be a great topic. What movie remakes are better than the original. You are correct I know there are some out there, I just can't think of any off the top of my head.
    - johnecash October 4, 2012, 2:22 pm
  • 2

    That's only because the original has Han Solo in it.

    • Disco
    • October 3, 2012, 6:50 pm
    As much as I would love that to be true, Harrison ford wasn't in it :(
    - johnecash October 3, 2012, 10:20 pm
    I could swear... that dude looks just like Han Solo...
    - Disco October 3, 2012, 11:34 pm
    The main character is Patrick Swasie.

    Though there is a very young Charlie Scheen in it, playing the crazy guy.
    - johnecash October 4, 2012, 9:45 am
  • 2

    As someone who has never seen the original, The 2012 trailer looks a lot better than the 1984 one. Must be your nostalgia if it doesn't look better to you.

    Part of the charm of the old one is that it is one of the last great Cold War "propaganda" films. Its right up there with Rocky IV. The movie itself was a B movie to begin with. None the less the cold war is over, and North Korea is no Russia. So I agree nostalgia is part of what makes it so great. The other part was just as kids today worry about the zombie apocalypse, in the 80 we worried about the very real threat of Communist invasion. I don't know about you, but I am not very worried about North Korea invading the US mainland. So there is very little plausibility for the film. For whats its worth I have watched it in the last month at an old friends house and its still great. Watch it if you never have. I would be interested in hearing what a younger generation thinks about this classic cold war film.
    - johnecash October 4, 2012, 10:13 am
    Last I checked, NK has nuclear weapons just like Russia did back then. The only difference is they did not threaten to use them on us? I find NK more plausible than current US enemies such as Al Qaeda, at least the people invading in the film have guns and not rocks. When I watch a movie, I do not really look for plausibility, otherwise you might as well watch a documentary.
    - casper667 October 4, 2012, 11:59 am
    And there is the difference between now and then. When the original came out, what you were watching was a real possibility. Please check again when it comes to nuclear capability of NK today vs Russia in the 60's. Its like comparing a hand grenade to a 2,000lb JDAM. Both are bombs, but one is a lot bigger. Also NK does not have nukes like Russia. Well they may have nukes like Russia of the 1950's. At best NK has something that is similar to fat man or little boy, a nuke from 1945. They don't ICBMs or Boomers (nuclear submarines). NK can not even feed its people without help from the US. When they remade this film it was going to be china that was attacking. That would had made a lot more sense than NK. But then the accountants said, Hey we want to sell this movie in China, so lets go back and digitally remake them to be NK. Al Qaeda would not be a good threat either since they are terrorist and not an army.
    - johnecash October 4, 2012, 2:20 pm
  • 2

    Propaganda. I'm going to see The Hobbit. I know it will surpass the original.

    I am not sure of that. The book, no chance. The cartoon? That will be difficult. Worst of all the New Hobbit Movie from the Single Hobbit book is going to be stretched into 3 movies. . . not sure if thats a good thing. We'll see though. The only upcoming movie I am looking forward to is Skyfall.
    - johnecash October 5, 2012, 10:40 am
  • 1

    Older movie definitely looks better because it was more of an original idea, though i do very much like when they remake action movies with the newer technology of today.

    That being said, I can not think of an old movie where the remake was better. Thats not saying they are not out there, only that I can't think of any off the top of my head. Any suggestions of what was better?
    - johnecash October 8, 2012, 11:23 am
    total recall....just kidding. that was an example of a bad one haha. Like i said, since its the same plot second time around its normally not as good, but i like the updated visuals and cinematography. I cant think of one off of the top of my head either, besides maybe some marvel comic movies like the Hulk
    - bufus101 October 8, 2012, 4:27 pm
Related Posts