With all the remakes and reboots that we’ve been seeing over the past decade or so, I feel compelled to review not just the remake of a particular film, but the original as well. For these movies, I tend to watch them back to back so both films are fresh in my mind when I choose to review them. I also review both of them in the same post, analyzing the similarities and the differences between each film. Like my other reviews, I will go into detail what I think is good about the film and what I think is not so good. I will compare identical scenes and the overall theme of each film and whether or not the remake did one thing better or worse. At the end I will conclude with which version is the better version and which one I prefer. Which one is objectively better isn’t always going to be the one I prefer, strangely enough. There are certain remakes that I feel are better in terms of how they flow and overall presentation. Sometimes a remake is nothing more than either a sequel or a prequel set in the same time as the previous film. For example, the 2011 version of The Thing is both a reboot and a prequel to John Carpenter’s film from 1982. I like both, but I prefer Carpenter’s version, because of multiple reasons: Practical effects instead of digital, Kurt Russell instead of Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and the complete lack of hope at the end of the film, compared with the possibility of a rescue in the new one. One can be superior to another. Remakes are common in all genres of film; horror is not unique in that regard. However, the horror genre is peppered with some really bad remakes. But it’s not just remakes that I will cover in this topic.
I will also be comparing sequels to the original. Now, one could say that when I review a sequel, I’m automatically comparing it to the original film. In certain regards, I guess I am. But sometimes, a sequel requires another look from a different angle, so that will be my intent. Other than that, this will follow a similar format as my other reviews do.