I am a fan of Friday the 13th movies. These cinematic masterpieces are the epitome of slasher films. They all star an indestructible villain, have immoral teens getting butchered and, most importantly, there have been a line of never-ending sequels. Friday the 13th movies are too classic not to love. But, much like an old dog, there's time when something needs to be put down.
The new movie, simply titled Friday the 13th, is coming to theatres February 13, 2009. It is a new member of the long line of horror movies that are being "re-imagined." This is a fancy term the studio uses when it doesn't want to tell the audience that they're being ripped off.
Re-imagining a movie doesn't have to be bad. Many consider Batman Begins to be a re-imagining of the Batman movies, and it was one of the most popular to date. And its sequel, The Dark Knight, has been doing nothing but breaking records since it debuted. So why does a re-imagining of Friday the 13th leave a bitter taste in people's mouths?
Horror movies, as a general rule, aren't great. They are made cheap and easy, and they make back tons in profit. So, if you are making a sub par movie without using any effort, but are reeling in tons of money, then why try to make a good one? Nobody, especially businessmen, want to reinvent the wheel.
The recent remake of Prom Night made $57 million so far, but only cost $20 million to make. House of Wax, which was released in 2005, cost $40 million to make, but earned back $68 million. And one of the most profitable re-imagings in recent history was the 2006 version of The Hills Have Eyes, which had a budget of $15 million, but grossed nearly $70 million. And each of these movies were panned by critics across the country.
Perhaps the most pertinent example would be the 2007 re-imagining of the Halloween movie. Rob Zombie's version of the John Carpenter classic was a commercial success. It cost $20 million to make and has raked in $78 million. However, it too, even with the enthusiasm of Zombie's fans, was a critical flop. Writer for the New York Daily News Jack Mathews claims the Halloween remake shows the laziness of today's horror directors.
"The new breed of horrormeister, Zombie included, works to shock rather than scare, and does it by heightening the imagery of violence rather than by heightening the tension."
In theory, there's nothing wrong with updating a classic for the current generation's audience. Halloween, while regarded as a crown jewel of horror movies, is too slow for some people's attention span. So, why not redo it? The problems come up when the director doesn't remake it for the viewers. When the director sees a classic like Halloween and wonders how to make money off of it today, well, that's when re-imaginings get the stigma hey have today. And with the poor history of remakes as evidence, there's no reason to be optimistic for the new Friday the 13th movie.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment