LEAVE WELL ENOUGH ALONE! REMAKE THE CRAP, SO SAYETH LISA SIMPSON

 

    So I saw this meme and it struck a chord. The message this social media fodder has resonated with me. Why do they remake good movies? Such a high standard to live up to? Why not remake crappy movies into good films.

    Short answer: Money.

    Hollywood has long since become creatively (and intellectually) bankrupt. Producers and production companies don't want to risk losing money. So, even if the movie ISN'T as good as the original, it is bound to make money just for the sake of comparison.

    That's right, folks. You've been duped again. Hollywood has no vested interest in making quality films. Leave that for the independent market.

    It also got me to thinking what movies I had high hopes for, but the reality of the movie dashed my expectations on the rocks of banality. As usual, I will limit these to horror and science fiction releases. It's what I do.

    The first film that should be remade into something entertaining (at least watchable) is from a hit or miss (usually hit) Director by the name of John Carpenter. Carpenter swings for the fences and oft times gets a home run. But when he strikes out, he really strikes out.

    In this case, the film in question is 2001's "Ghost of Mars". Carpenter tried to make a campy tongue-in-cheek flick and failed miserably. The film reads neither as a cult classic or even brainless entertainment. It is dull and forgettable. Yet the premise was fun and promising. 

    During an interplanetary prison transport off of a Mars penal colony, officers find a charnel house. What a great description for a boring film. What if it were remade into something that was worthy of the description? Perhaps with young up-and-coming actors like Zoe Margaret Colletti and Coy Stewart? I'm seeing franchise opportunities...

    Next is a film from another visionary director, Wes Craven. The film was adapted from a 1985 sci-fi novel called "Friend" and was called "Deadly Friend". Craven's success with "A Nightmare on Elm Street" tainted test audience perception of the film, which was focused on relationships and interpersonal conflict. Not enough blood was the consensus.

    So, the film was re-edited to include gratuitous gore. In fact, the best scene in the whole film is when Anne Ramsey (Throw Mama from the Train, Goonies) has her head split open by a basketball. It's a three-pointer. Truthfully, not even the added splatter could save that stinker.

    But what if the premise were updated to include themes such as social media and artificial intelligence (AI)? What if social commentary was subtle and the suspense was not? What if there were a better outcome?

    Finally, a film that launched Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson's theatrical career and boasted a good supporting cast with Karl Urban and Rosamund Pike. Adapted from the video game, "Doom" failed to connect with faithful Doom players as well as anyone who never touched a computer keyboard in their life. 

    What if the film kept the budget and stars, but adapted the script and direction to be more faithful to the original video game? Sounds like a built-in market and success story to me.

    I am sure there are scores of films out there that could be done right. Wouldn't such an endeavor make for a great film competition? Imagine Sundance only for remakes of bad movies? We could call it Scumdance. Such a challenge would be worth pursuing.