MovieChat Forums > The Thomas Crown Affair (1968) Discussion > why I prefer the remake...

why I prefer the remake...

posted 14 years ago by blackrooster
4 replies | jump to latest

I hadn't seen this movie for a while, so I watched it again last night and was reminded at the several reasons why i've always preferred the remake.

1. The big thing that bothers me is how McQueen pulled off the heist. He had criminals and/or normal people pull it off while waving guns around at innocent people. So because he was trying to "stick it to the man," he thought it was okay to endanger the lives of the very people he claimed to be standing up for. Not only would several of these people probably need counseling, but at the end, one of the robbers has a SHOTGUN and some poor dude gets shot in the leg or foot with a pistol. Crown is lucky someone didn't get killed ... and my dad was shot in the leg once and it took years of therapy to be completely well again, so at the very least, he could have given some money to the poor guy. So because of this, I just don't like his character. In the remake, I want him to succeed ... but screw this version of the guy ... he needs to burn.

2. The heist is boring. It mostly just involves waving guns around and carrying out a bunch of bags. Absolutely no real thought into the heist at all. Yes, I know that the movie is more about the characters, but when you watch a movie about a heist, how it comes together should at least be a bit unique.

3. Crown isn't directly involved. All he did was pay people to do the work for him. He should have gotten his hands dirty. Another reason to not like his character.

4. I don't like the fact that he's just stealing money. How boring. Unlike the character's love of art in the remake, he's just stealing more of what he already has. The idea is that he's stealing it in defiance of the system, but it's not like he gives it away. In the remake, Crown had no intention of keeping that painting ... it was all about the thrill. But in the original, he keeps the money for himself. He should have at least given it away to people who actually needed it. But of course, he wouldn't because he's not just bored ... he's a greedy jerk who is okay with putting other people in danger. Not to mention that his defiance of the man means absolutely nothing since only a bank in Zurich was affected. Totally nonsensical.

5. The way that Vicki figures everything out happens too fast. One moment, she has no real idea what happened, and then all of a sudden, it hits her ... but she figures it out so precisely, that it's as if someone walked up to her and handed her the script. In the remake, there are a series of small discoveries which lead to the revelation.

6. From what I've read, the ending is supposed to mean that Crown did the second robbery for her, more or less, and that she would get 10% of THAT money, since she would be the one to salvage it ... and then she would have to decide whether or not to go to leave her job and follow Crown. Um ... no ... no way will they pay her the 10% fee. It's not going to happen. Why? Because not only did she not retrieve the money from the first heist, but she was involved with Crown, and since she called the police and let them know that he had confessed and still kept being involved with him, that could make her an accomplice on both robberies. Will they try to convict her? No. But there's no way they would pay her, and in fact, they'd probably fire her. Because of all this, it makes the ending ridiculous, so that the "cool' ending means nothing.

All that being said, of course McQueen does a great job and the movie is a technical treat. The new remake may be a bit too flashy, but the original simply has too many flaws and leaps in logic for me.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] finnegansword-772-990306 13 years ago

I saw these movies in the wrong order, but having now viewed the Steve McQueen version, the remake has more meaning for me. Nevertheless, I prefer the original to the remake.......

[–] captainloco 13 years ago

Good reasons to prefer the remake. The ending of the original is still cool. The whole point was to test her. Remember the telegram... Decided to leave early, bring the money or keep the car. Love, Tommy He outsmarted her and the cops. He was the epitome of the bored greedy business man.Thomas Crown enjoyed being the smartest guy in the room and he kept score with money made by real estate transactions or bank robberies.

[–] swc11-48-550133 13 years ago

Just a few issues I have with these statements. Otherwise I liked the in dept insight into the movie you did.
1. There were many real life robbers during the depression era that pointed guns at people while they robbed banks and even though they did that the public still loved them. Its difficult to rob a place is your very specific who you point a gun at and Thomas wanted the place robbed; these people were just doing their job and didn't have the same moral compass that Thomas had so they had less reason to care that a gun was aimed at others.
2. Like you said, its just so we can get to the characters. Theres movies like Ocean's eleven (1963) that the heist is also pretty lame, in Bullitt the heist is bordering retarded and All the Presidents Men does the robber in a couple minutes even though the movie is because of it. The thing they had incommon with Thomas Crown is that the heist was just to move the plot along so we can get to cat and mouse game.
3. It would be too easy to chase after someone directly involved; catching someone not there but planned it is way more interesting. All the Presidents men, Charles Manson, Ocean's eleven (he did very little of the stealing part, he just masterminded the whole thing).
4. I think that this statement is correct but only to a todays standards point of view; it was probably quite entertaining when this was made.
5. True. Can't think of a arguement because she doesn't talk out loud about how she's thinking like what Russo does or shown pictures so we can see how she connects the dots.
Its a fun ending. Is that really a smile or not. Whats gunna happen. Will the spinning top fall and we'll find out it wasn't all a dream or is he still in a deeper layer of inception. Did the Thing die or did it transform into Keith David or Kurk Russell.