1990 VS. 2017
First off lets just recognize Tim Curry for being the masterpiece that he is...Thank You! Now, Stephen King is an amazing story teller. I cannot figure out why this film was re-made especially when the original is fine just as is. The only thought that comes to mind is that Hollywood is bored and needs to consider revamp as a money maker-ridiculous. None the less I will compare and contrast the two films.
1990: The casting had some great picks for its time, everyone came together and worked well together whether child or adult. I enjoyed the old time feel when looking back into the thick of it. The wardrobe was well selected, hair styling, etc. The transition felt natural. Pennywise is exactly what he should have been as the friendly looking/talking circus clown that carries the creepy unknown but you felt at home.
2017: I have to say, I went into this version bias and thinking the worst but I was too soon be wiped clean of those notions. The cast of young kids was amazing. I had thought talent in this day and age was lost but impressed is an understatement. This Pennywise was portrayed well, but i just didnt feel the fear as much as I did with the original. Yes, Bill Skarsgard is a great actor and his makeup was perfect but the creep and initial curiosity was lost for me. I absolutely hated how they still had 2 parts to this film and made you wait an entire year for the second installment when it was damn near close to the original! It could have been summed up in one film just made a little bit longer or cut some unnecessary scenes. If the second installment was in some way different from the original then I could understand the prolong adult transition but it was just as the original.
All in all they are both great, but you don't need to stray far from the original 1990 miniseries unless you like one of the actors in the remake.
Pet Sematary 1989 Vs. 2019
I personally grew up with the 1989 version of this story. I found that '89 has a much creepier tone to it than the 2019 remake. I do not think I have to break this up into two different paragraph because they are generally the same with small changes. Louis and Rachel move from city to suburbs to raise their two small children Gage and Ellie, only to find out they live on old haunted Native American burial grounds. Neighbor Jud, explains that there has been a pet sematary build by sad children the lost their pets. The cemetery is haunted and any pet that are buried there comes back to life with an evil spirit. A few weeks into their new home, Gage is killed, Louis feels that mourning his son is too much to bare so he buries Gage in the pet sematary.
Now this is where the original an the remake differ. Gage the young son gets killed in the original, as where the remake it is Ellie the oldest child dies and is reborn as a demon spirit. The only other difference is, '89 Jud helps the family beat the demons and tries to keep the family. '19, Jud is portrayed as a wife beater who does not help the family.
I recommend the original. Great actor choices and it seems to flow better. Rachel's sister Zelda is more scary in the original which horror films should stick with you the way Zelda did for me an many other kids who watched it.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 1974 Vs. 2003
I am sure that the 1974 original was scary for its time but if you watch it these days, it is rather comical. The acting and edits are amateur but the story great for a good old classic horror film. I prefer the 2003 version because the flaws from the '74 are not to be taken seriously. 2003 holds the terror and interest you would expect from an on the edge film such as this. Jessica Biel in the '03 version is incredible. She holds such natural talent and this version is the best you will find. I am very disappointed in the film companies giving the okay to continue redos this film, no out of the blue patterns or new discoveries for this story it is the same thing with each remake.
Halloween 1978 Vs. 2007
With all of the sequels this film has produced it is like a remake each time. The 1978 original is best but I have to talk about Rob Zombie 2007 version. With the original it has a good back story and a dynamite creep factor. I enjoyed Rob's version because it was in the eyes of Michael Myers, his perspective. I felt that was an excellent take to introduce a side of not only to break up the usual but to actually feel this person turn into a monster. I suggest the original 1978 version, even though it is dated, it still has you on the edge. No need to see any of the sequels, they are all the same-Michael always comes back to kill, he himself is un-kill able. 2007, refreshing to see another take on this story. Rob Zombie definitely knows his stuff when it comes to making horror films.
No comments:
Post a Comment