What Movie Remake Would You Like To See?

[lifesizehobbit]

Given advances in technology and the ability to create impressive movie sequences, and knowing good stories that were nearly impossible to produce in the past on the scale they deserved, what is a movie you would like to see remade today?
My choice would be a Part 1, Part 2 rendition of Rafael Sabatini's "Captain Blood" originally starring Errol Flynn and directed by Michael Curtiz. The hardbound unabridged book is excellent with robust character development and numerous adventures the original film attempted to capture, but just couldn't gather it all in.
Given all the digital technology, I think the film would be amazing if done correctly without going beyond the original story or taking too much "Hollywood" license. Think Pirates Of The Carribean without the hocus-pocus folklore, but a real story.
What are your ideas?

 

[lordofthepiperings]

I'm wanting either Hollywood to do another film or HBO/Netlifx to do a series of Dick Tracy.

 

[mayfair70]

@lifesizehobbit
It sounds like you would like the series "Black Sails" on Starz. Basically it's Treasure Island interwoven with historical events and piracy in Nassau. The first season is kinda slow, but it sets up very well for the following seasons and the action sequences on ship are gripping. Well acted too.

 

[simong]

It would be nice to see some of the old Ealing films done again, in fact one of my favourites 'whiskey galore' is coming out this year I believe.

 

[philobeddoe]

First off....I NEVER EVER want to see my all time favorite movie The Dirty Dozen get a remake. Now then, I would like to see modern, high budget remakes of Jules Vernes' 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Journey to the Center of the Earth.

 

[theosprey247]

None I would like Hollywood to come up with original ideas. I know I'm not holding my breath either.

 

[danielplainview]

Brave New World.
Nineteen Eighty Four.

 

[philobeddoe]

1984....directed by Terry Gilliam!

 

[warren]

I'd prefer something original rather that "already been done" stuff. Too much of the new stuff relies on computer generated material. Also, there are only a small handful of actors and actresses alive who could measure up having to carry a movie/ Even fewer directors are working today who are able to let the camera and the actors/actresses tell the story. I understand the youngsters want noise, explosions and etc. I prefer movies where the lighting, actors/actresses, directors, sets, etc. present the story. I want impressive acting and cinema, not computer generated crap. Perhaps I'm too old to be answering the Dave's question.
And comparing a movie to the book it was adapted from is asking too much. Ten people reading the same book will, often as not, have differing "takes" upon finishing. No different than two or three director's differing vision of the book.
Nope, make the producers work. Make them come up with new material instead of botching up the older efforts. Remakes usually come up short when compared to the originals. I can't see "How Green was My Valley" being remade and improving on the gritty original. None of my favorites could handle being remade as the actors/actresses and directors are all deceased. It was the people that made the films excellent, not the pyrotechnics. Not even the book's author as the movie is always adaption. Think "Red Badge of Courage" or any Bogart film.

 

[lifesizehobbit]

It sounds like you would like the series "Black Sails" on Starz.

Mayfair - I actually did a cable upgrade just to get the free Starz so I could watch Black Sails. Twenty minutes into Episode 1, I turned it off and never went back. I'm no prude, but if a TV show relies on a heavy dose of smut and sex to get the viewer, then personally that tells me the story is bound to be weak. Now if the same level of work that I saw in Justified or Downton Abbey had been applied to Black Salls, then I might have stayed in it longer. Same thing happened to me with SOA, got too dark and too dirty to maintain a long relationship.
However, I know that's just my tastes and not others.

 

[sablebrush52]

Batman VS Superman - as quickly as possible

 

[davet]

None of my favorites but can think of a few that could have been done better. Jeremiah Johnson comes to mind without veering so far from the book.

 

[tarheel1]

I am thinking the Exorcist and maybe Labyrinth.

 

[indianafrank]

Think Pirates Of The Carribean without the hocus-pocus folklore, but a real story.

Pirates Of The Carribean, in my opinion one of the most over rated movies of all time. I know the younger generation loved it. However, growing up and watching Errol Flynn as a pirate, I became spoiled.
I don't know if a remake would help.

 

[deathmetal]

The Martian Chronicles, preferably directed by Peter Jackson.

 

[sablebrush52]

Labyrinth...
I worked on the title sequence for that film, one of the earliest examples of "photorealistic" CG animation. The production originally tried to get a live owl to fly in specific directions for their title sequence. Owls proved to be untrainable, at least for the crew, and the shooting lights confused the poor bird, who smashed into a couple of seniors before immolating itself.
Then someone got the idea of building a mechanical owl to be flown on wires. The result was so embarrassing that the DP opened the camera body and exposed the undeveloped film to light so nobody could see it.
Finally the project went to Digital Productions, where Bill Kroyer directed animation and I painted the texture maps, one of the first times painted textures were applied to geometry.

 

[deathmetal]

Sable, I'm looking forward to those memoirs. Now you know a good editor

 

[deathmetal]

...not that your normal writing style demands editing for any faults of its own.

 

[okiescout]

"Jeremiah Johnson comes to mind without veering so far from the book."
You nailed that one Davet! Realistic or not the book was a romance between man and nature. It inspired you and made you wish you were there.

I never got over the Flathead Princes in the movie. I guess ole Redford was afraid of having a counterpart that was prettier than himself :D

The movie, after having read the book, was like having your mouth set for a cheeseburger and fries and finding out it was going to be broiled fish
Books are generally better just because of the mind, but the writers failed to truly capture the passion of nature and the trappers spirit of appreciation for all he surveyed. People, animals, awesome vistas of the upper Missouri and beyond, life and death. The movie showed some of it but missed the mark in the heart. The book was criticised for romanticizing the west. Maybe so, but what a book.
It was a good movie just not what the book portrayed. For me, movie to book, was like the difference between a good smoke and a great one. It just did not capture the aura the author portrayed. Maybe because Redford could not sing :lol:

 

[deathmetal]

Three Days of the Condor -- Redford at his beta best.