David AnnandaleNov 18, 2022
Joseph Losey’s 1951 remake of M isn’t a bad film. In fact, it’s pretty good. Given how closely it follow its model, it could hardly turn out otherwise. It is, though, somewhat redundant. In the first two pairs of screenshots here, the first of each pair is from 1931, the second from 1951. I could multiply the examples, but the carbon-copying is pretty striking in these images from the opening scene.
#horror #filmnoir
Show threadJeff XilonNov 18, 2022
@davidannandale I'm sure the movie is as fine as you say, but not only does this comparison make '51 look redundant, it makes it look inferior as the original (such a great film) just looks better.
Show threadDavid AnnandaleNov 19, 2022
@JXilon You are not wrong. Lang apparently said the remake led to his film getting the best reviews it had ever had. My surprise is that this is actually entertaining and watchable, despite being what you said.
Show threadJeff Xilon
@davidannandale that’s a pretty fair surprise. I think it’s fair to say that most film remakes, even ones that play it fairly straight, fail that test, with obviously quite a few super standouts that buck the trend.
Nov 19, 2022 at 1:00amWeb
Show threadDavid AnnandaleNov 19, 2022
@JXilon And I wouldn’t call this a standout — it’s no THE FLY, that’s for sure. The surprise in some way is that it isn’t a disaster.
Show threadJeff XilonNov 19, 2022
@davidannandale Yeah, no I think that's the rare zone for sure. Most are bad, some are incredible and a few are...perfectly ok and watchable.
Show threadDavid AnnandaleNov 19, 2022
@JXilon What I’m often surprised by (though I really shouldn’t be), is when remakes of movies that were mediocre to start with somehow manage to be worse. I mean, come on, the bar was low — how did you still fall below it?
Show threadJeff XilonNov 19, 2022
@davidannandale Yeah that's a real badge of shame.