Shortest Time Between Original and Remake?
- Thread starter Skaught
- Start date
The Hulk movies come to mind, but I'm sure there's a better one.
Kittlemeier
Sr Member
The two recent Punisher movies beat them by a year. Didn't look up release months though.
Edit: I guess those are technically reboots rather than remakes though.
Edit: I guess those are technically reboots rather than remakes though.
DARTH SABER
Master Member
Would they be considered a remake?..THey had different stories.
as a matter a fact the second hulk film seemed to pick up where the last left off. more like a reboot, sequel?
What are the rules here?
I bet if we look back farther in film history there were probably films that were even months apart. Remake fever is probably nothing new.
I think the only true 'remake' was Psyco, because it was a true shot-for-shot remake of the same story with the same characters.
Most 'remakes' are the same characters and most of the same story but with some changes. I think the Hulk and Punisher movies would count as they are not sequels.
The new Spiderman may be a 'reboot', but if they start with Peter before the bite and then retell his origin it's really a re-make with changes to the original story.
Most 'remakes' are the same characters and most of the same story but with some changes. I think the Hulk and Punisher movies would count as they are not sequels.
The new Spiderman may be a 'reboot', but if they start with Peter before the bite and then retell his origin it's really a re-make with changes to the original story.
What really qualifies as a remake?
You could cast a rather wide net on that definition or cut some slack.
If we made a truly book accurate War of the Worlds or Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, people would scream remake, but would they be remakes if they were truly source material based?
Some films are very different from the original source materials, more like inspired by the works of so and so.
You could cast a rather wide net on that definition or cut some slack.
If we made a truly book accurate War of the Worlds or Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, people would scream remake, but would they be remakes if they were truly source material based?
Some films are very different from the original source materials, more like inspired by the works of so and so.
To me, this is a remake:
Movie A: characters, story, plot, direction, setting, theme.
Movie B: comes out after movie A, has the same characters, the same basic story, is not a sequel, does not acknowledge movie A at all, same basic theme with the same characters.
Nightmare on Elm Street for example. New one had the same basic story ( for Freddy) and same character, same basic plot, but new setting, new characters (different kids), new ending. It was a 're-boot' but also a re-make as the original character and story seed was still there.
Movie A: characters, story, plot, direction, setting, theme.
Movie B: comes out after movie A, has the same characters, the same basic story, is not a sequel, does not acknowledge movie A at all, same basic theme with the same characters.
Nightmare on Elm Street for example. New one had the same basic story ( for Freddy) and same character, same basic plot, but new setting, new characters (different kids), new ending. It was a 're-boot' but also a re-make as the original character and story seed was still there.
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
ACK!
I was going to say 1990's La Femme Nikita and 1993's Point of No Return (which is a literal shot for shot remake). But... La Femme Nikita was a French film. :unsure
Okay found one... but an oldie...
The Squaw Man 1918 is a remake of The Squaw Man from 1914- both silent films by Cecil B. DeMille.
Of course being this old it probably falls into the "amusing, but who really cares" category. :lol
Kevin
The Unholy Three 1930
The Unholy Three 1925
One was made as a silent film and one as a talkie. Both are good and feature two of the same actors, but with different directors and leading ladies. The first was made by pre-Dracula Tod Browning.
The Unholy Three 1925
One was made as a silent film and one as a talkie. Both are good and feature two of the same actors, but with different directors and leading ladies. The first was made by pre-Dracula Tod Browning.
DuneMuadDib
Sr Member
Along the lines of repeatedly remaking/adapting the same thing in the early 1900s:
The Maltese Falcon (1931) - starring Ricardo Cortez and Bebe Daniels
Satan Met a Lady (1936) - The Maltese Falcon adaptation with the names changed
The Maltese Falcon (1941) - The only version most people have heard of
The Maltese Falcon (1931) - starring Ricardo Cortez and Bebe Daniels
Satan Met a Lady (1936) - The Maltese Falcon adaptation with the names changed
The Maltese Falcon (1941) - The only version most people have heard of
cayman shen
Master Member
There was a great article on Cracked about this...apparently The Wizard of Oz is a remake. Who knew? Apparently different versions of the same movie came out every few years pretty commonly, so this nonsense is nothing new, and in some cases (Wizard of Oz) produced classics.
Solo4114
Master Member
You beat me to it.
MrGzilla
Well-Known Member
Does the universal Dracula movie count? After filming for the English movie was done each day, the Spanish version was shot, but using differant camera angles and some differant sets. That's got to be the quickest remake ever! XD
I guess that would be considered a foreign remake thought. Ohh well
I guess that would be considered a foreign remake thought. Ohh well
BrotherWilliam
Well-Known Member
Spanish Dracula doesn't count. It's not a remake if the studio is funding both films and the Spanish version is being shot at night after the English speaking "Day" actors have left for the day.
darthgordon
Sr Member
To me a re-make is something that's sole source material is a movie. For instance, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Last House on the Left, Halloween and Friday the 13th would be considered re-makes because the stories didn't come from anywhere else.
I don't consider any of the 2000 Dracula movies re-makes because they are different interpretations of source material (or in many cases, just re-use of the characters and loose sequels to the original story).
The exception to this rule would be Psycho. While it was based on a book, the re-make did not use this as source material and instead did a shot for shot, word for word re-make of the original movie.
When there's source material (such as books or comic books) and it's a popular franchise, I consider starting over a re-boot of the franchise, but not a re-make of the original movie. I don't consider Batman '89 a remake of Batman '66 or Begins a re-make of '89.
So to me:
Re-make- a re-make of a movie using only a movie or television show as source material.
Re-boot- the restart of a popular franchise with source material of screen (books, comic books, urban legends, etc.).
Re-imagining- a buzz word used by producers and directors to let you know that they are re-making something in a way that totally screws up the original story.
I don't consider any of the 2000 Dracula movies re-makes because they are different interpretations of source material (or in many cases, just re-use of the characters and loose sequels to the original story).
The exception to this rule would be Psycho. While it was based on a book, the re-make did not use this as source material and instead did a shot for shot, word for word re-make of the original movie.
When there's source material (such as books or comic books) and it's a popular franchise, I consider starting over a re-boot of the franchise, but not a re-make of the original movie. I don't consider Batman '89 a remake of Batman '66 or Begins a re-make of '89.
So to me:
Re-make- a re-make of a movie using only a movie or television show as source material.
Re-boot- the restart of a popular franchise with source material of screen (books, comic books, urban legends, etc.).
Re-imagining- a buzz word used by producers and directors to let you know that they are re-making something in a way that totally screws up the original story.
JoMamma_Smurf
Master Member
Cracked article. 6 Classic Movies You Didn't Know Were Remakes | Cracked.com
Similar threads
