CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › MOVIE OF THE DAY: LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (2009)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MOVIE OF THE DAY: LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (2009)

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
by Jeremy G. Butler: link

Jeremy preferred the LAST Last House.
post #2 of 18

Dennis Iliadis was like that even when he was in Greece. He'd skirt actually being transgressive but would never follow through. Which is a shame, because I think he has chops. If he gave up trying to be controversial, he'd be able to get some really cool stuff made.

post #3 of 18

I thought this was a much better film, though historically insignificant. But I'm not a fan of the original at all.

post #4 of 18

Definitely better made. But quality film making was never part of that movie's "significance". I never once felt scummy while watching the 2009 version. While there where numerous times during the original that I'd ask myself: "Why am I watching this? Is this movie somehow making me a worse person?" And their misbegotten attempts at humor just amplified its negative aura. It was a negative experience in every aspect but one I'm glad I've had and something that I'll always associate with the title. The remake didn't work like that, at all.

 

Aja's remake of The Hills Have Eyes is a perfect example of how to approach remaking films like this. 

post #5 of 18

Of all the exploitation films I've seen, many have given me the feelings that Last House did, and many were better made films on top of that. I find it to be unremarkable except for it's historical significance in the careers of many important filmmakers, and how it influenced others later.

 

The remake was an effective dark thriller, bleak but not scummy. I don't fault it for doing something different and, as far as I'm concerned, it creates more tension and thrills than the original creates disgust and depravity.

post #6 of 18

You see, that adds to the original. At least for me. It feels like they didn't want to make an actual movie. Just show people suffering and getting debased.

 

And Jeremy was right. The daughter should have died.

post #7 of 18

The remake isn't about the revenge though. Not really. Most of the second half of the film, the parents seem to be acting in self-defense, not revenge, so the daughter living doesn't really change anything except maybe raise the stakes, since she's mostly helpless.

 

In fact, even if it was about revenge, you could argue the daughter living adds moral complexity, since it weakens their reason for vengeance, but not their thirst for it.

post #8 of 18

If all these are true, what makes this a remake to the original? 

post #9 of 18

Basic story structure? The only reason it was made was to cash in on the original's name and noteriety. Fidelity to tone and themes seems irrelevant, especially when it's, in my opinion, a more effective movie (granted, in an entirely different way). The same could be said of The Thing, though this isn't nearly as good as that.

post #10 of 18

Does anyone think of The Thing as a remake though? I'm old but not old enough to know how the movie was marketed originally.

 

I expected a remake of Last House On The Left to piss people off. This was just afraid to take that extra step. I wanted it to do to me what Irreversible did. Noe should have done this.

post #11 of 18

Yes, The Thing was a remake to The Thing.

 

Chasing the "scummy" vibe would have made the LOTL remake even more of a poseur, but they blew it by not getting into some of those grief/revenge themes with what was a batch of exceptional actors. Missed opportunity.

 

"Mari should have died" was the general consensus among critics. Jeremy's just late as hell to the party. AGAIN!

post #12 of 18

I know it was a remake. I don't know if it was sold as one.

post #13 of 18

Interesting question; not sure when remakes started being "sold" as remakes, as they most certainly weren't always bragging about being remakes. I was 12; I was keenly aware it wa sa remake, and every bit of press and every review made mention of it. Beyond that, not sure when remake status became a marketing plus (e.g., "Rob Zombie's bold new vision...")

post #14 of 18

I thought this was ok. If I had a problem, it wasn't that the remake wasn't "scummy" enough (it was never going to be, and I was fine with that), my issue would be that the new Krug kinda sucked.

 

Frankly I don't get the whole Dillahunt thing. He was just kinda there in No Country, and same for this one. His few minutes of screen time in The Road (that bit where he looks at Viggo's son like he's dinner) was creepier than anything in the LHOTL remake.

post #15 of 18

This movie may crap out in the middle, but the ending is legendary!!

post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disciple_72 View Post

I tGo wahought this was ok. If I had a problem, it wasn't that the remake wasn't "scummy" enough (it was never going to be, and I was fine with that), my issue would be that the new Krug kinda sucked.

 

Frankly I don't get the whole Dillahunt thing. He was just kinda there in No Country, and same for this one. His few minutes of screen time in The Road (that bit where he looks at Viggo's son like he's dinner) was creepier than anything in the LHOTL remake.



 Go watch Season 2 of Deadwood immediately.  

post #17 of 18
I've only watched the unrated version but if I watch it again I'll probably just watch the R version. The extended rape scene just seemed wrong. I just felt bad for the actress having to go to that place, for something that was artistic in only a visual sense if that. The ending is like a random suggestion they chose to film. It belongs in some other movie.
post #18 of 18

Both movies have their qualities, but I'd much rather watch The Virgin Spring.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › MOVIE OF THE DAY: LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (2009)