Teen Forums - Teen Chat, Teen Help, Teen Advice & Support

My mistake, what I referenced in my previous post is the All American Massacre, a film that was never released, by Will Hooper and details Chop Top and no Leatherface.

Well At least, they won't be as bad as the 1998 remake of Psycho with Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates.

I don't understand the whole 3D thing, I mean I can't judge cause I've never seen one in the cinema before but for the price they sell the tickets at, I think it's ridiculous! I wanted to see the new Final Destination in 3D and it was £22.50 for two tickets. :')

But I hate pointless remakes/sequels, I've seen the original, I've seen the remake and I think everyone knows which one is 10x better! But I suppose they just want to make money nowadays- I doubt they're that bothered about entertaining the audience anymore...

Orginals are always better, and what I love about sequels is that they usually give a back story, which is the only thing I like about them.

I disagree. There are times where the remake is much better than the original when you look at films in general. I'd say The Coen Brothers True Grit was better than the original. Cape Fear (1991) was better than it's original. The Maltese Falcon was far superior to both the original and the second attempt at the story. The Thing is probably better than The thing from another world. Some would argue that the Later Scarface is better (However, I prefer the Hawks version). Cronenberg's The Fly was probably better than the 50's version. Some would argue that The Ring was better than Ringu (Although, I once again disagree). So remakes can be much better than the original. Its just difficult to do.

^^^ Valid points, but usually the remakes are shit.