Top 10 Most Unnecessary Movie Remakes
Definitely the most unnecessary remake. It doesn't have the charm or silliness of the original. And definitely the most important that it's missing it's Arnold Swazzeneger.
I actually like this movie when I first saw it. But after I watched the original one, that version is way better.
The original film isn't even that old.
I like Colin Farrell, Jessica Biel and Kate Beckinsale but the movie itself, was weak
Terrible! Remakes are so pointless and such a waste of money. What IS the point of them?
Just awful. Enough said!
Original looked funny and entertaining. This one looks stupid
God! This movie is a waste of time!
I guess they were trying to remake the original because of how old and dated it was, but who in the right mind thought about casting Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates?
When you remake Psycho with Vince Vaughn as the lead role, something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
Every once in a while comes a good remake, that happened in 1982, now Hollywood had to go remake a remake.
They didn't add anything new nor smart to the story. The main female character was very annoying in addition
Prequel or sequel, who cares? This movie was awful and absolutely unnecessary!
The 2011 film is a prequel to the 1982 film. It is not a remake.
Not scary at all. Just silly
Original is better but nevertheless this one is worth to watch. And Sophia Bush is very good ( and hot! ) in this movie.
It's just a shorter rehash of the original, it's like the movie was running on fumes.
Original was much better
It seems like Hollywood just can't stop letting the classic beloved movies alone. The original had great acting, a selection of likable characters, iconic songs and heartwarming moments. Willy wonka was an eccentric and brilliant, yet likable candy maker, charlie was a good compassionate kid, grandpa joe was Charlie's funny and unforgettable grandfather and the bratty kids were amazing actors. They managed to impress the bratty stereoptypes of that time : augustus - the greedy fat kid, veruca - the spoiled brat, violet - the obnoxious gum chewer and mike - the brainless T.V. watcher. The songs were very memorable and had impressive lyrics.
The remake, on the other hand, was beyond awful. The main characters were unlikable and dull, the songs were annoying and forgettable, the bratty kids didn't seem bratty enough, the ending was bad and the look of the film was too dark and creepy for my tastes.
In this version, willy wonka is a cold hearted anti-social douchebag who thinks just ...more
Wow! There are so many butthurt people in the comment section! Is quite weird that all the people who read the book hated the 1971's version and like the 2005 one. You guys are too nostalgic. The original willy wonka managed to be entertaining for a few times, but then he became boring and his jokes weren't funny at all. I mean, he quoted from classic literature and played classical music. He also seemed t friendly and social for someone who spent 20 years in a factory. Depp's wonka was funny and dark and his jokes actually were funny.
Burton tried to do a version which is more accurate to the book, but it was a fail. It looked nothing like the book. In Roald Dahl's novel, Wonka is a warm kind likable candy maker just like in the original movie. Johnny Depp made Wonka a cold-hearted rude incoherent man-child. I feel bad for the kids who didn't grow up with the original movie.
But what can I say?! The concept of remakes is to transform the characters in their opposite.
You mean when Roald Dahl hated the 1971 movie he didn't want Gene Wilder to play Willy Wonka, thought it was too much about Willy Wonka and not Charlie. Roald Dahl called the 1971 movie a little too saccharine too sappy and sentimental. Maybe this is more like the book. It should've been called Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in 1971 because that's the name of the book.
This remake is crap, and that ending was atrocious.
Tim Burton didn't even wanted to work on this.
Why is there even a lion king remake in the first place? This shouldn't have been touched. All this is is a nothing more than just a shot-for-shot remake of the original but with extra filler inserted to make the run-time longer. If you like it, fine. But I'm sticking with the original '94 version and Simba's Pride. Both of which I have at home free to watch whenever I want and have a much better time watching. I really think Disney should only remake movies that either failed or are obscure, and leave the classics alone. It would be a better use of time and resources and requires a lot more creativity. This is just a pointless and lazy excuse to make money off of people's nostalgia for the 90s. If you want to watch the Lion King, just watch the 1994 version because this one adds nothing except photo-realistic visuals. It would save you time and money and you would at least have a better time with it than with the remake.
Save your money and watch the original. The story is the same and the remake was only made to make this much money. Could you imagine how much money disney will make if a Frozen remake gets made or they do a deal with Epic Games to make a Fortnite movie.
Seriously? Remaking a film that not only is already perfect but also already LOOKS as breathtakingly gorgeous as the original Lion King? (NOTE: same goes for Beauty And The Beast as well)
This is not a remake, this is a parody.
Were they trying to make a bad movie? Because all this movie is sums up to: Dull characters, blatant sexism, laughable writing, and the irritating PG-13 rating dumbing down this product even further.
Whoever put this on the list might be sexist. There is absolutely nothing wrong with women being Ghostbusters. I heard similar things about Captain Marvel, which was one of my three top favourite Marvel characters. I might go and watch it while it's still on Netflix. I recommend giving this a chance.
Plot doesn't make sense. the movie looks like reused clips from Jurassic park.
The original was an awesome movie featuring a new cyborg policeman who fights corporate greed, corruption and crime. The new one should be called Cyborg Dad because it talks about his family more.
Seriously, screw you, you boring PG-13 trash.
The characterless characters also speak so quietly, like why?
They should have just made Hellboy 3 instead!
AWFUL acting from the actors for Aladdin and Jafar, the Genie is quite annoying, and this movie is just a rehash of the original.
I'm sorry but this movie doesn't deserve to be seen as the best remake ever. This is the most overrated movie of 2019 and here's why:
How does this have a higher budget than Godzilla KOTM? This movie shows that it's not spending its budget wisely, resulting in the visuals to look ugly and something you would expect in a Disney Channel movie. In the original Aladdin, colors were used to represent the movie's narrative but in the live action remake, it looks like black-and-white. Why is everyone praising the Will Smith Genie? This Genie is boring, lazy, and just unfunny. Will Smith is a terrible comedian and is a disgrace to Robin Williams' Genie, the comedy genius. Not only that, but Will Smith is a really bad singer like Emma Watson in Beauty and the Beast. That means Friend Like Me was botched up and Prince Ali is easily the worst song number in the movie. Speaking of song numbers, the songs are fine but they come with flaws as well: "Arabian Nights" is way too slow and ...more
Useless movie filled with the most pointless subplots in movie history. Skip this and wait for Lion King (or just rewatch the original)
This movie looks like trash they should just leave the classics alone!
I guess Leigh Whannell has never read the book!
H.G. Wells is rolling over in his grave!
All the charisma and charm the original had got just about completely sucked out of this borefest. The only saving grace for me is the real stuntwork, but that just makes me think this should've just been a straight Xtreme Sports movie or documentary instead.
The Patrick Swayze and Keanu Reevs one is better than this garbage film.