Poltergeist remake (film)

[Neil]

Sam Raimi will produce the remake to POLTERGEIST for MGM. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hea...ergeist-317606

[acealive1]

please dont. there's been enough real death associated with the original franchise. it makes it pretty well known you shouldnt go disturbing this one.

[Mike70]

while it is good news that ol' sam will be producing this, it is getting to point where i'm almost shocked when an original idea becomes a movie. seems like if it isn't based on a book or a remake that hollywood wants nothing to do with it. i know that isn't true and is generalizing to a large extent but it certainly seems like it. then again, this is my major stop on the internet (other than the science websites i visit), so most of my movie news comes from posts here. since a lot of the threads are about remakes and their multitude of sins, that no doubt feeds into my perception of things.

[acealive1]

while it is good news that ol' sam will be producing this, it is getting to point where i'm almost shocked when an original idea becomes a movie. seems like if it isn't based on a book or a remake that hollywood wants nothing to do with it. i know that isn't true and is generalizing to a large extent but it certainly seems like it. then again, this is my major stop on the internet (other than the science websites i visit), so most of my movie news comes from posts here. since a lot of the threads are about remakes and their multitude of sins, that no doubt feeds into my perception of things. the internet kinda spoiled us. before this was a giant thing, we didnt what was a remake or based off a book. and it seems the original ideas dont make any money (the eagle, ghosts of mars, prequel to the thing, source code) its almost like u gotta make paranormal activity 3 times and have it be way dumber each time for u to make any money.

[LouCipherr]

and it seems the original ideas dont make any money (the eagle, ghosts of mars, prequel to the thing, source code) Not to be disagreeable, but I cannot consider the prequel to The Thing as an "original idea" considering most of the content was ripped directly from Carpenter's version. Just sayin'. As far as the remake of Poltergeist - I think everyone already knows my feelings about remakes:

[bassman]

please dont. there's been enough real death associated with the original franchise. it makes it pretty well known you shouldnt go disturbing this one. Wait.....so because the girl that played the oldest daughter was strangled to death by her deranged boyfriend and the girl the played the youngest daughter died of medical reasons, THAT is why you think they shouldn't remake the film??? Instead of urban legend myths and curses, I'll stick with the thought that they shouldn't remake the film because the original still holds up as a great film today.....

[shootemindehead]

Oh no thanks... Sam Raimi is rubbish. This will be a fat disaster. Why does Holly weird keep doing this?

[krisvds]

Come on, Raimi aint rubbish! The guy did Evil Dead and Darkman. I even liked Drag me to Hell a lot. That being said it does seem kinda pointless to remake a film that, as Bassman said, still holds up as a great film today. Then again, I said the exact same thing about the 30ies King Kong back when Jakson was doing his version. I still do.

[Neil]

Sam Raimi is rubbish. Here we go again... More or less rubbish than James Cameron?

[bassman]

I'm curious as to what MZ will have to say about this. IIRC, he's only just recently seen the original, so I'm curious to hear if a "fresh" pair of eyes thinks it's worth a remake. Most of us probably think the original holds up phenomenally, but that opinion could be biased because we've been watching it for so many years....

[MinionZombie]

I'm curious as to what MZ will have to say about this. IIRC, he's only just recently seen the original, so I'm curious to hear if a "fresh" pair of eyes thinks it's worth a remake. Most of us probably think the original holds up phenomenally, but that opinion could be biased because we've been watching it for so many years.... My ears were burning, so I'm happy to oblige. I saw Poltergeist for the first time last year - and I friggin loved it - I don't see much point in remaking it. The original is already spot on, it's highly likely therefore that a remake will be perfunctory at best. One thing is for sure - it won't be better than the original. No chance, no how. I wish they'd remake movies that didn't work the first time around. Drive-In Massacre is awful, but the nostalgia factor of drive-in movie-viewing combined with a grotty slasher flick would work well in this day and age. It'd be relatively cheap to make and if you put some effort in, you could actually make a pretty good flick. Why do they insist on remaking classics? You simply cannot beat it - why bother at all? It's not even like it's a story that can be transposed from one era to the next for a new take - or make a follow-up that ties-in to the original, but in a new era (for the latter, see Wall Street 2 as an example). Put simply - no need. Put out an extras-loaded blu-ray of the original (not the DVD cut'n'shut Blu that never got over here) - and re-release it in cinemas for the fans - instead. The 25th Anniversary "Special Edition" DVD is a piss-take.

[shootemindehead]

Nah, sorry lads. I understand some toes are being stepped on here. But, no, he's rubbish. 'The Evil Dead' is only note worthy because of its cult status, brought on largely because of its video nasty days. It's ok, but nothing special. I prefer 'The Evil Dead II', but only because it's a more accomplished attempt of the first go. But, again, nothing thatgreat. Even so, it's Raimi's best effort. After that, 'A Simple Plan' is worth a look, but nothing to rave about. 'Army of Darkness' was awful. 'Darkman' was terrible. His 'Spiderman' trilogy sucked (to use an American term) Everything is else is dross and no doubt, his proposed remake of 'Poltergeist' will be disapointing too. As for Cameron, at least he has two films that I can actually consider classics.

[Neil]

he's rubbish Sorry folks, logic has left the building... We really need to sort these silly unnecessarily extreme binary views out folks! Has he directed well? I'd suggest he has? Has he directed something original? I'd suggest he has? Has he written something original? I'd suggest he has? So even if you didn't enjoy any of the resulting products, how can he be deemed "rubbish"? This is just like the nonsense we had with Cameron a couple of weeks ago where he was "$hit"? I'm sorry, but when someone uses terms like "$hit" and "rubbish" about individuals of this calibre - be it that you enjoy their films or not - I'd suggest it pretty much gives everyone the impression the individual's opinion is far from fair and/or considered, so is more of a rant than anything constructive. -- -------- Post added at 07:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:21 PM ---------- My ears were burning, so I'm happy to oblige. I saw Poltergeist for the first time last year - and I friggin loved it - I don't see much point in remaking it. The original is already spot on, it's highly likely therefore that a remake will be perfunctory at best. One thing is for sure - it won't be better than the original. No chance, no how. I wish they'd remake movies that didn't work the first time around. Drive-In Massacre is awful, but the nostalgia factor of drive-in movie-viewing combined with a grotty slasher flick would work well in this day and age. It'd be relatively cheap to make and if you put some effort in, you could actually make a pretty good flick. Why do they insist on remaking classics? You simply cannot beat it - why bother at all? It's not even like it's a story that can be transposed from one era to the next for a new take - or make a follow-up that ties-in to the original, but in a new era (for the latter, see Wall Street 2 as an example). Put simply - no need. Put out an extras-loaded blu-ray of the original (not the DVD cut'n'shut Blu that never got over here) - and re-release it in cinemas for the fans - instead. The 25th Anniversary "Special Edition" DVD is a piss-take. The original is a classic, and I do fear no matter how good a remake turns out, it will simply not be comparible to the orginal as it simply got there first! None-the-less, if it's good I'll be tempted to see it...

[AcesandEights]

Come on, Raimi aint rubbish! ^ I agree! Though I may lump some of my Raimi likes squarely in the "Guilty Pleasure" file, I can't say he is a horrible director.

[shootemindehead]

Sorry folks, logic has left the building... We really need to sort these silly unnecessarily extreme binary views out folks! Has he directed well? I'd suggest he has? Has he directed something original? I'd suggest he has? Has he written something original? I'd suggest he has? So even if you didn't enjoy any of the resulting products, how can he be deemed "rubbish"? This is just like the nonsense we had with Cameron a couple of weeks ago where he was "$hit"? I'm sorry, but when someone uses terms like "$hit" and "rubbish" about individuals of this calibre - be it that you enjoy their films or not - I'd suggest it pretty much gives everyone the impression the individual's opinion is far from fair and/or considered, so is more of a rant than anything constructive You need to unknot your knickers Neil. First of all, logic has not "left the building", it's a matter of opinion...and opinion based on having watched every one of his pictures, bar his very early efforts before 'The Evil Dead'. Some of which have been multiple affairs. To me, his final products have left a lot to be desired. I don't find them particularly enjoyable, or THAT well made. 'The Evil Dead' can get a pass (somewhat), because he did pump anything and everything into it. However, the finished article is FAR from a great, or even good film and it only enjoys its elevated position amongst horror movies fans because of its troubled and dodgy history. I like 'The Evil Dead II' because of Bruce Campbell primarilly. But, it's essentially a retread of the first film, so after one has seen the first one, the second one is inevitably a letdown. Also, just because somebody has "directed something original" doesn't make him or her a good director. I also don't agree that he has directed particularly well, either. Again, it's a matter of opinion. Opinion based on actually viewing his material. I can't abandon those opinions, just because they might be unpopular with some people. I don't particularly rate Cameron for much of his output (I didn't call him shit though) and I see the vast majority of Raimi's output as rubbish. Highly disapointing, could have been much better and not of that high a calibre. ...and I have no doubt WHATSOEVER, based on his previous material, that his proposed remake of 'Poltergeist' will be rubbish. Of course, if it turns out to be good, then I'll glady eat my hat. I think my headgear is quite safe though.