Post by MacReadyOrNot on Jan 26, 2020 8:50:46 GMT -5
There's no way the remake is in any way, shape, or form better than the original. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not in a million years.
Gus van Sant experimented with doing a shot for shot, beat by beat remake, and I applaud him for that, but that's all his movie is. A school exercise that failed miserably. Maybe it would have worked with different actors, but it would have worked better if it added something to the original story, or just followed the original book more closely.
Hitchcock can rarely be beat.
Windows: "Childs, what if we're wrong about him?!" Childs: "Well then we're wrong!"
Original for me with flying colours. I loved how Hitchcock got the realistic screaming in the shower scene.
Also apparently the first film to show a toilet flush apparently.
I think I saw the remake once years ago but the original is a classic. This remake also shows the issue with remakes. If you change too much is it really the same film anymore? But if you don't change enough or as appears with this one, anything, then what is the point, you might as well just watch the original.
I did watch a couple series of Bates Motel although never finished it. Was a prequel and I didn't mind it although I kind of watched it as kind of its own thing