Hitchcock's The Birds to be remade.....why? why? WHY?????

[edbermac]

<snip>
LOS ANGELES, California (Hollywood Reporter) -- "The Birds," Alfred Hitchcock's classic 1963 horror tale, looks to be taking flight again as a Universal Pictures remake.

Filmmaker Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes production label is in negotiations to make the update with producer Peter Guber though his Mandalay Pictures banner.

The new version would be based on the short story by Daphne Du Maurier, to which Universal owns the rights and which inspired Hitchcock's original movie.
<snip>

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/26/film.birds.reut/index.html

Of course I'm sure the reason is money, but why remake a near-perfect movie? Why not redo some BAD ones and make them better? A few years ago they remade Psycho...hello, McFly? Anyone at home? That turned out great didn't it?

And this is gonna be remade by the guy who gave us that classic Pearl Harbor...:puke:

[The_Casual_Observer]

Why? Because they long ago ran out of stories.

This one was already remade into "the night of the living dead" years ago.

[deutsey]

9. Soon we'll be hearing about how they're remaking the remakes

:eyes:

[jpgray]

1. Producers mistake superfluities for the real reasons a film is successful

You can take the best plot in the world and without a talented screeenwriter, crew, cast, director &c. it can still suck royally.

[ceile]

2. That's not the only one

There's going to be a remake of Strangers on a Train. Now, that one is untouchable. One of Hitch's best if not the best .

[NYCGirl]

6. NO! NO! NO!

My favorite Hitch (with Shadow of a Doubt following as a close second).

[OldLeftieLawyer]

8. YOU SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU ARE A FILTHY LIAR AND I'M REPORTING YOU FOR THIS.

IT'S GOING INTO YOUR PERMANENT RECORD, YOU RAT.

LIAR, LIAR.

<falling down, weeping>

[6000eliot]

Of course.

They can use CGI now to make it all much more gross.

[Liberal Veteran]

5. I still don't see how CGI could the playground scene any scarier.

That was just creepy as hell.

[6000eliot]

7. None of it really needs to be redone

It's as stupid as the Psycho remake of a couple of years ago.

[lenidog]

13. I remember that it was an exact copy of the original

the only difference was that the upped the amount stolen and it was in color. I remember one critic asking why anyone would waste time, money and film just to make an exact duplicate.

[6000eliot]

19. The stated reason was that kids don't like to watch movies in B/W.

[lenidog]

26. My reply would be "I guess its your loss."

[6000eliot]

30. I agree

When I have taught this film in the past, students moaned over the fact that it was in B/W, but after they watched it they weren't sorry. I think the biggest problem is unfamiliarity.

[ironflange]

35. Thoughts that go thru my mind:

Every time I see that playground scene: "How the hell did they get those damn birds to sit there like that?!?"
If I see the remake (slim chance): "Computers. Ho hum."

[China_cat]

10. And then have the idiot who's

'sanitizing' films ruin it.

[lenidog]

15. AMC is running a documentary tonite at 10:00 pm EST on the

film sanitizers. I figure I will watch it and get pissed off at the idiots who want to do it.

[uppityperson]

18. Gross does not =scary, except for Mr.bushandhisevilminions

Scary is the buildup,waiting, waiting, waiting...

[Left Is Write]

3. No Hitchcock film should be remade.

[Fiona]

11. Hitchcock remade

a few of his own movies, most memorably The Man Who Knew Too Much.

The Judy Garland/James Mason version of A Star is Born was a remake - as was of course, the Streisand/Kristofferson version.

Remakes aren't bad in and of themselves.

[Left Is Write]

33. No, and I don't mind Hitchcock remaking his own movies.

But he's long gone, and without Hitchcock, I don't think they should be remade. The Birds is a Hitchcock classic. They should leave it alone.

[rebel_yell]

34. i actually quite enjoyed

Bay's "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" remake. but this one most definitely does not need to be remade.


grr....stop fuckin with the classics

[redqueen]

4. Studios are chickenshit.

They want to believe they can count on a nice ROI, so they like bankrolling 'sure bets'. Idiots.

Also, originality is nearly dead.

[chickenscratching]

12. what are you looking at, butt-head?

[ronnykmarshall]

14. I hope Tom Cruise is in it!!

Co-starring Paris Hilton.

No really. I love see Paris Hilton pecked to death a bunch of birds.

[lenidog]

16. That would almost be worth a rental to watch.

[deutsey]

22. LOL

[davidinalameda]

24. you beat me to it!

great minds think alike?

[ronnykmarshall]

28. That's right!

[GoddessOfGuinness]

17. Here's a different perspective...

We enjoy revivals of plays with a different set of actors and directors...

Symphonies are rarely recorded only once...

And old movies never die. They and their remakes will always be with us as long as they're worth keeping around.

I think the tendency to shun remakes is due to the visual aspect of the art form. Most of us would not care to see cheesy remakes of the Mona Lisa or Starry Night.

On the other hand, it might be interesting to see what Van Gogh would have done with Mona Lisa, or how DaVinci would have seen the Starry Night.

I have a hard time imagining The Birds as anything but a Hitchcock masterpiece. Still, would it be such a bad thing if someone else created a new masterpiece?

[lenidog]

25. The problem is that they don't make a new masterpiece

The reason the film is a classic is because it was perfection. How do you better perfection? Also rarely do remake get done by a director or creative team that is equal to the original. At best you usually end up with a pale reflection of the original. The best directors in Hollywood understand this. That is why you don't see Scorsese, Spielberg, or any of the rest of the A list directors out there trying to remake any films.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

32. Remember that film is still a relatively new art form...

Revivals of plays don't always achieve the same success as first runs. And there are plenty of flaccid renditions of Brahms Symphonies out there.

Given the huge production costs of movies, thus limiting the number of remakes possible; I'd say the number of successful remakes vs successful originals is pretty good.

A couple of examples of decent remakes:
Last of the Mohicans
Scrooge
Henry V
The Fly

[lenidog]

20. Because most screenwriters today can't come up with a

original or compelling idea to save their lives. So they have to go back and steal someone elses work and 9 times out of 10 royally screw it up. For instance "Day of the Jackal" was made into the "Jackal" which was a piece of crap.

[lenidog]

21. Okay everyone how many remakes have been better or at least

equal to the original?

[davidinalameda]

23. I want Paris Hilton to play the Suzanne Pleshette character

I want to see her get her eyes pecked out

[Spinzonner]

27. Melanie Griffith needs the gig

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0761511.html

[terrya]

29. EWWWWWW Michael Bay

Oh, fuck, this is a fucking disaster already if they get that overblown untalented hack to direct.

[BearClaws]

31. All They Will Do Is...

Use a hundred gallons of blood, turn up the volume and say "FUCK" about 10,000 times.
I am about sick of "New" movies.