Alas, another rant about Remakes.

At this point, I wish I could be surprised or even angered to hear someone finds James Whale's Bride of Frankenstein lacking enough that they can do it better, but we're so far down the rabbit hole of "remake this" and "remake that" I find nothing shocking.

Okay, if Takeshi Miike decided to remake Harvey, that would be a surprise*.

I understand the conventional (albeit trite) argument that "nothing new is left to be discovered, so why are you so upset with Hollywood cannibalizing itself?"; it has its place, even if I find it to be a pretty relativistic argument. Nothing's original anyway, so who gives a shit about anything? Oh boy, that makes enjoying the arts fun. The best part is that this hyper-relativistic argument actually curves all the way around itself so that you can either be a snob who only likes the "classics" in order to escape the "nothing's new" position.

And I'm not saying there isn't something to appreciating the nuance of repetition in art because - yes - it's true that we're building off of existing riffs. The difference is - especially right now - is how transparently lazy Hollywood is about ripping itself off. It used to be that a BIG NAME REMAKE wasn't the norm or half of the movies released in one year. Sure, the other movies that were essentially ripoffs or variations of a theme jockeyed for position, but they did so under the auspices that they were trying to be their own film. These remakes aren't even bothering.

For example: High Plains Drifter and Pale Rider are, for all intents and purposes, the same movie. However, they at least pretend to be different. Even if the basic plot is the same (and, if you want to get picky, the same as many westerns) - stranger protects the locals against evil force - Pale Rider is not trying to BE High Plains Drifter. It's not trying to capitalize on the name or the fact that people liked Drifter; Pale Rider is trying to exist on its own terms, not to usurp the popularity of its antecedent.

Friday the 13th is. The Last House on the Left is. Hell, a movie I liked: The Hills Have Eyes is trying to push the original out of the picture and at the same time capitalizing on the fact that you know the title. Star Trek was so clearly trying to do this that is marketed itself as better than "your father's Star Trek" but at the same time it drew in as it pushed away. I've intentionally been trying not to pay attention to The Wolf Man, and the silence surrounding it doesn't fill me with glee.

Yes, we always have the "old" one. I get that argument too, although I fail to see the usefulness of it. The point isn't merely that two copies of a film with the same title exist on the shelf, but also that the way these films are discussed now change. Now the original film has to fight for its place against a younger, hipper version that only seems to be there because people are too damned lazy to watching something "old." Discourse about cinema is rapidly becoming the discussion of replacements and "improving" outdated films. Homages aren't enough anymore; now if a Blade Runner wants to have any kind of impact, it needs to cut the bullshit and call itself Metropolis so the film can go head-to-head with the "inferior" original.

We've actually reached the point where Peter Jackson's three hour "homage" to King Kong seems quaint because it failed to really take on the original. That's how hard the studios are fighting against themselves to prove that all you need is the youngest stars, the flashiest directors, and the craziest editing to make a "dated" film better. It's funny because in this new wave of "slasher" films, instead of just ripping off the basic structure of the films - like every studio or dude with a camera did from 1978-1986 - they'll just take the whole movie and do it again. Like Funny Games.

So yeah, the remake thing has gone beyond aggravating. At this point I'm more interested in the arguments about remaking than the remakes themselves. Eventually we'll get around to more "original" films that aren't trying to be something you know but better. I can go back to pretending, for example, that Joyride isn't basically Duel and try to enjoy something without being reminded that "you know this movie but this time it's better!" My Yojimbos and my Fistful of Dollars can peacefully coexist as intertextual discursive partners and still be better than Last Man Standing. They all get their relative merits, at least until someone explicitly remakes one.





* And, if by some unholy miracle it does happen, I call creative consultant's credit.