How could it take a turn for the worse if it is shot-for-shot?
The acting in Psycho (1960) is clearly dated. It surely couldn't be the acting in the 1998 version that caused the low rating. It also can't be because it was lazy, since we aren't rating the movie on laziness. We are rating it in pure movie rating. What is it?
I honestly don't know. I personally enjoyed this remake. A lot of people complain that remake don't follow the original yet this one did and it was panned by everyone.
shareMaybe it's because it was shot-for-shot.
share[deleted]
It was shot for shot for pretty much 95% of the filming, with a few little changes to update it. It was a waste of time really.
Exorcist: Christ's power compels you. Cast out, unclean spirit.
Destinata:💩
This. IIRC, this movie had a bit of a backlash because it was shot-for-shot remake. I think there was also some drama surrounding anne Heche. Not just her flat portrayal...i believe it was around this time she was walking around the desert naked spouting about aliens?
People complain when source material is changed too much. They complain it wasn't changed enough, as this movie showed. Heck, people would complain regardless. You can't please everyone. Especially when you're tackling a classic. It'd be like remaking, God forbid, Citizen Kane. Psycho is a cornerstone of horror films.
A movie being older doesn't make it "dated". That's not what "dated" means.
And a lot of things go into making a movie work or not, what makes it good or bad or so-so.
Hitchcock himself famously said "casting is character" -- so despite the remake being almost shot-for-shot, the actors are different and so is the era's zeitgeist.
You felt sympathy for both Perkins' and Leigh's characters in the original. And that's everything. But while I think Vaughn gave a better performance in the remake than some believe, you never felt anything for Heche as a trashy character, so you forgot all about her 2 seconds after she'd been murdered.
That makes a huge difference in the impact of any film, and is often the problem with most remakes.
Also, it's very difficult to re-capture the ColdWar/TwilightZone-y/end-of-the-world vibe of the early-'60s and its effect on movies, especially, thrillers. It's a very specific, undiluted mood and it's tough to conjure 40 years later.
--
LBJ's mistress on JFK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcXeutDmuRA
OP:
You need to ask why one film is less quality than the other? Jesus, how can people be so plain un-in-tel-li-gent. There is no answer, I suppose. You don't what's "clearly", if you were sitting on it.
You made your coffee from the same boiling water, why does it not taste the same as the other brand?
If you are 11, wolfmansgotnards, please tell me and I will apologize.
Anne Heche was lacking in her comprehension of Marion Crane's core character. Having never seen the original film, her iteration of the character fell flat.
Or it's related to juvenile trolls who rate films low because they're unhappy. That happens.
Bored now.
because it is exactly that its not a new experience. also the editing , dialogue , pace and acting dont feel right in a modern horror mystery thriller.
share