Favorite remakes of the horror genre anyone?

Now, how did THAT get in there?

I fully endorse 1-6. Enjoyed 7, 8, 9, and 11.

I'll have to give it some thought. EVIL DEAD 2 would be near the top of my list somewhere as well.

Somebody's bound to add FUNNY GAMES.

Is FUNNY GAMES a horror movie? I could see the case for it, I suppose, but my gut says no. No it isn't.

Edit - for that matter, neither is KING KONG. And why specifically 18? Why not 20? or 15?

Yikes.

I'm not even sure it's a remake. It's practically the same movie. Kind of like Van Sant's Psycho. And if anybody nominates that, I will hurt you.

Also, if King Kong is on this list, then we're being awfully liberal with the word "horror". If that counts, then I'm going with The Incredible Hulk. Has a monster, must be horror I guess.

Rob Zombie's Halloween shouldn't be on anybody's list of favorite anythings. It doesn't even belong on a list of favorite Rob Zombie movies. It doesn't deserve to be on a list of favorite movies in which Daryl Sabara dies.

I'm surprised you of all people would consider 2 a remake. I've always thought it was a straight up sequel, but one that the first act is basically a recap that isn't exactly what happened in the previous film, and embellishes a lot. Army of Darkness does the same thing to a lesser extent.

Yeah, I just see it as a sequel too. The recap is really just 10 minutes out of the 85 minute run time. And there's also the fact that Raimi kinda doesn't give a shit with these movies regarding continuity and what have you.

Yeah, it's just a sequel. They couldn't get the rights to the original footage to do a recap in the beginning of the movie so they just condensed and reshot the original and made it the first 15 minutes of the second one.

BTW: That list leads me to believe Cyrus might need a few prescriptions to help stabilize his condition.

Funny Games is the scariest movie listed so far, though.

Since they share the same source material, could not the Hammer versions of Dracula & Frankenstein be considered remakes of Universal's?

King Kong is not part horror. There is no percentage of it that can logically be labeled horror. Raiders of the Lost Ark has more horror in it than King Kong. And no, Raiders is not a horror movie either.

Zombie's Halloween is one of the worst movies ever made.

Now, maybe I'm a big ole pussy, but I always thought the original Kong's Skull Island sequence played out like a huge long ass nightmare. Yeah, I know the effects are all quaint and shit nowadays, so nobody's really scared of it anymore, but just think of the scene in which we first see Kong. Ann's all tied up, just awaiting her doom. Camera's fixed. Something BIG is coming through the trees. Ann can't escape, and neither can the viewer.

Nowadays, a nightmare would get filmed with a bunch of quick confusing cuts to something spooooooky and a couple of loud, strangely edited music stings. But nightmares are rarely all that chaotic (mine aren't, anyway). They slowly build up feelings of dread, and maybe you kinda already know what the horrible thing is that's going to show up, but the real horribleness is that you can't escape. You won't wake up until you've had your dose of fright.

Kinda like in Mulholland Drive, actually. You know what scene I'm talking about.

Werner Herzog's NOSFERATU (1979) is one of my favourites remakes... but if we are talking guilty pleasure remakes then I'd say I have a strange amount of time for Platinum Dunes' AMITYVILLE remake.

I think the original gets way too much praise and , as slick and as ridiculous as the remake gets, I think it is a whole lot more fun than the original film. If you can't make a Haunted House movie scary (THE CHANGELING) then at least make it fun. The '79 film is just dull.

Absolutely love the American remake of The Ring. I saw it before I saw the original, which probably helps, but I feel that it really improved on it in almost every way, particularly the visuals. Quarantine (the American remake of REC) was surprisingly good as well, probably due to being incredibly faithful to the original. I think both versions of the Grudge are trashy, pop-up book style entertainment, but the remake does it better for me. The visuals from that really stuck in my head (still sometimes think about the bed scene when I'm trying to get to sleep), plus it's got Sarah Michelle Gellar to look at during the boring parts.
I also love the Dawn of the Dead remake, a lot more fun and fast paced than the original, which drags a bit for me.
I'd be interested to see the Funny Games remake, but I'm not sure I can handle watching any version of that film again. I've never been so upset by a horror film. Scared, sure. Depressed, yeah. Funny Games felt more like actually going through something horrific watching it. I'm not sure I want to experience that again.

I loved the American version of THE GRUDGE*. It is the scariest film I've ever seen in a theater.


Also, THE HILLS HAVE EYES* gave me nightmares. Growing up, whether it be books or videos, retarded people were invariably depicted as friendly gentle giants. When they caused violence (Like Lenny with the mouse), it was always accidental and greatly distressed them. What I saw in this film flipped all that on it's head, and the result was one of the most frightening films I've ever witnessed.


PS Like Cleo, I also am quite fond of QUARANTINE*. Jennifer Carpenter turns in a very strong performance, and had the film been seen by more people I no doubt would say her work was of "star making" .

Foot note: A "*" indicates a film that I've only seen the remake of.

I completely agree with both of these points. I haven't seen the Amityville remake, but the original is just awful. It's so determined to be true (which it isn't) that it forgets to be an effective horror film.

No, but the Hammer version of The Mummy counts as it is a remake of Universal's The Mummy's Hand.

Pretty much nailed my feelings of this list, plus I echo Brundle's comments on Nosferatu. The rest of the list I could take or leave, as I find most of the originals far more frightening than the slicker, MTV style, remakes we've been getting lately.

The originals in a lot of cases were throwing some creepiness on screen in ways nobody really saw before (check out the trailer for the original TCM - that's some badass stuff right there), and giving us some heavy chills that would linger on long after the film was done. I also found the original Last House on the Left far more horrifying.

In all honesty, I don't know if Friday the 13th was much of a remake as opposed to a reboot (if we're getting technical). The kills were completely different, victims weren't camp counselors trying to reopen Crystal Lake, far less Mrs. Voorhees (barely saw any Nana Visitor - a shame), I will say, however, the first kills in the latest Friday the 13th were pretty nasty, especially the last victim, who turned out to be merely kidnapped, though I thought for damn sure she was a goner when the sequence stopped abruptly, and it was on to the next scene.

"Too polished". That's the way I put into words the small, but crucial difference with alot of these remakes. While I can't fault a recent production for having a healthy budget and some top-quality production elements, it's the "by-the-seat-of-our-pants"/near guerilla style born of necessity that gives the originals in these cases their strength. Also, the lack of filmmakers trying to cast from fashion mags helped. Here were some truly "normal" looking people. (See: THE CRAZIES (1973))

The genre had a certain unpredictability that, without question, was wearing off by around 1983. Yet, even the rather silly WITHOUT WARNING outdoes a good deal of current films with it's doses of low-budget practilities and limitations of the esthetics of the time, up to and including David Caruso in some small-ass shorts.

Yes. Yes. YES. Much better than I ever could've said. The Crazies is an excellent, excellent example, and will likely be proven far scarier than the upcoming remake (I'll still see the remake anyway, though, but the point still stands).

The DIY feel to the earlier, original films is a quality that elevates the fear factor and tension that modern remakes rarely can capture. I also agree with the fashion model victims - the folks back in the 60's-mid 80's looked a hell of a lot more like people I'd see day to day as opposed to an overly made-up big-boobed or overly muscled victim in today's horror (real people had curves back then; not too many stick figures). That raises the creepiness a bit; if the victim looks like someone you know or could see in your neighborhood or at work, what's to say THEY couldn't be the killer's next victim? Ups the realism a bit.

Me too X 2. '79 did have a puking nun though.
LOL

The Thing, The Fly and Dawn Of The Dead

1. Invasion of the Body Snatchers
2. The Fly
3. The Thing
4. The Hills Have Eyes
5. Nosferatu
6. Funny Games
7. The Ring

Special Shout Out: Psycho

1. MAD LOVE
2. MARK OF THE VAMPIRE
3. HOUSE OF WAX
4. WEB OF THE SPIDER
5. NOSFERATU - PHANTOM DER NACHT

and, of course, INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and THE THING.

Not all of these are perfect. They are just the ones that I really enjoyed the most. I'm sure I have probably forgotten a few, but here's what I have so far...


House of Wax (1953)
The Mummy (1959)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
Nosferatu: The Vampyre (1979)
The Thing (1980)
The Fly (1986)
The Blob (1988)
Night of the Living Dead (1990)
Body Snatchers (1993)
The Mummy (1999)
The Ring (2002)
Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
Dawn of the Dead (2004)
The Grudge (2004)
War of the Worlds (2005)
King Kong (2005)
The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
My Bloody Valentine (2009)



Decent:
King Kong (1976)
Cat People (1982)
Invaders From Mars (1986)
Cape Fear (1991)
Village of the Damned (1995)
House on Haunted Hill (1999)
Thirteen Ghosts (2001)
Willard (2003)
Toolbox Murders (2003)
House of Wax (2004)
The Amityville Horror (2005)
Pulse (2006)
Quarantine (2009)
The Last House On The Left (2009)
Friday The 13th (2009)

1. The Thing
2. Invasion of the Body Snatchers (not a fan of Abel Ferrara's version)
3. The Fly
4. Funny Games
5. Dawn of the Dead

I'd love to see Herzog's version of Nosferatu. Apparently out of print though.

Cape Fear would probably be on this list but I haven't seen the original yet so I suppose that'd be cheating.

Me three.


Hey, Jonathan, you can order Herzog's Nosferatu for $13.99 on Amazon (Buy it through the CHUD link, why dontcha?).

I'm trying to think of something that hasn't already been said... uh... LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS?

I forgot about that one. Cheers, mate.

I'll throw out Badham's DRACULA. A nice Hammer throwback. Love it for Olivier.

Really? God, I hated Olivier in that.

The only thing that works about that movie is John Williams' score, which I owned, and can no longer find.

Why did Badham give Langella the same hairstyle Travolta had in Saturday Night Fever?

Well, he was wearing the same shirt, so what the hell.

Add another notch of half-hearted support for AMITYVILLE '05. The original is just dreck, but Reynolds is pretty strong in the remake and Andrew Douglas conjures up some effective atmosphere at points. Not technically a good film, but as far as horror remakes go it's certainly a vast improvement on the original.

Since my EVIL DEAD 2 nom got such a response, I'll suggest GREMLINS 2.

Seriously? The winking smiley wasn't clue enough?

I don't really consider The Fly or The Thing remakes.

The 'dawn' remake is probably my favorite. I don't have much use for the others.

C.S., why don't you consider them remakes? If they're not then what are your requirements for a remake?

They're so far removed from their original source material that they have little in common except their general ideas.

Just like I don't consider Last House on the Left a remake of The Virgin Spring.

The original Amityville is one of the funniest films ever made.

"It's the passage...to HELL!!!"

Well they are.
That doesn't make them not remakes, though. Does a remake have to be exactly the same as the original?

Not only can a remake dramatically depart from the original, it absolutely should do so. Otherwise, what's the point? Taking the premise and exploring it from a different perspective is what a good remake should be all about. Otherwise, you end up with Van Sant's Psycho.

The only real justification for not calling The Thing or The Fly remakes is that all the films are based on previously published works, which would allow one to make the case that they're all adaptations.

What Greg said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83sTIfgP8Eg

And the remake gets props for THIS





AND THIS



Bless you, Rachel Nichols.

would Hollow Man be considered a remake from the Invisible Man movie? not the same title but almost same concept. I did like hollow man but not hollow man 2 i read about it and told myself nope don't do it lol.

how about when a stranger calls? the 2006 was toned down and not really all that good from the 1979 version.

i would not consider any of these to be in my top 10 remakes list

I'm disappointed it took so long for someone to mention The Blob.

There are just too many good horror remakes, it's been a mainstay since the beginning of time, and if I was the ruler of the internet I'd say versions of classic novels like Dracula or Frankenstein should make up their own lists because there are SO MANY quality adaptations. This might be too hard for me to participate. I have to retire and think about it.

I've often wondered why it is that horror films have such a superior record when it comes to quality remakes. Maybe they inherently lend themselves to that, since a modern filmmaker is more likely to have a finger on the pulse of what scares a modern audience.

I think I started a thread about that once. Damned if I'm gonna go look for it.