THE FIVE WORST HORROR REMAKES

In recent years a considerable amount of popular horror films have been remade to give them a modern twist, and of course give the film makers a chance to cash in on the original films success. This is fantastic for fans of the genre. . . If they get it right! However it seems that many of these remakes simply do not match up to the original and prove that when something works, it should probably be left alone. Here I have selected five particularly bad attempts to recreate the magic of classic horror films.     

By Kayleigh Clarke

The Wicker Man (2006)

This remake of the 1973 cult classic sees Nicholas Cage play a policeman, sent to investigate a young girl’s disappearance on a Neo-Pagan Island. It's a  strange community where women call the shots and unsurprisingly the pagan inhabitants turn out to be a lot more sinister than they seem.

In the original we are treated to majestic scenes of coastal Scotland and legendary acting performances from Christopher Lee and Edward Woodward. Nothing here compares to that. As unfortunately the remake strays too far from the original plot and soon descends into a ridiculous battle of the sexes.

Due to its 12A rating, there was little scope for real horror and menace and any attempts to scare the viewer are lost among the peculiar events that occur throughout the film. In order for a horror film to scare the viewer it needs to be accessible, the viewer needs to be able to put themselves in the main characters shoes. This is very difficult here as the storyline is absurd, and therefore it is vulnerable to unintentional comedy. I found myself laughing rather than hiding behind a cushion as I watched Nicholas Cage’s character seemingly lose the plot, shouting at children and hitting women before dressing up as a bear. 

This film is so bad it is almost entertaining! Almost.



House of Wax (2005)

I enjoyed the 1953 version of this film; Vincent Price played the perfect crazed serial killer. So when I heard there was to be a remake starring none other than Paris Hilton I was sure it was a bad idea. I wasn't wrong. The plot is something of a cliché - a group of college students decide to set up camp in the middle of nowhere. You know the drill - they are then stalked by a stranger in a pick up truck and discover their car has been tampered with, meaning they are stranded in a strange ghost town. Obviously they then start snooping around in an old creepy wax museum (who wouldn't?!) and get picked off one by one by the murderer. Although the deaths are gory, it's not exactly scary and largely irrelevant as all the bad acting and boring scenes leading up to the action make you lose interest and ultimately, not give a crap. A slow first act means that it takes too long to get going and it is quite disjointed at the best of times (the characters are separated most of the time) It is almost like three storylines are going on at once - and none of them are particularly engaging. The only highlight for me was when Paris Hilton’s character is impaled through the head by a spear. That's hot! (Said in a Paris Hilton voice)



Prom Night (2008)

The original in 1980, staring the horror film legend that is Jamie Lee Curtis was a bit of a cult film so this remake had a lot to live up to. Unfortunately it was negatively received by a lot of fans. Again it strayed too far away from the original plot, with the only noticeable similarity being murders taking place at a prom.

The target audience for this version was basically young teenagers, so the gore and violence was toned down considerably. The death scenes are a little too straight forward, just knife in, job done; a far cry from the dramatic and inventive death scenes we are used to seeing in slasher movies nowadays.

The original storyline was basic, but it is the simplicity that makes it a great scary movie. The remake tries to add twists and a new motivation for the murders. The convoluted plot involves a teacher becoming obsessed with one of his students and he therefore decides to kill her whole family, as you do. Years later, he escapes from a mental asylum (classic horror film cliché!) and arrives just in time for the poor girl’s prom night to claim his prize victim. Before he reaches her he takes down a few more insignificant cast members to add to the fear factor. The concept is odd and contrived, plus the fact that we know who the killer is this time makes it much less scary. The moments which usually make you jump are just too predictable and you quickly find yourself just willing them to happen just to get them over and done with.



The Haunting (1999)

I was really eager to see this film, not only because it was filmed at Harlaxton Manor which is five minutes from where I live, but also because of my love of supernatural horrors. However I was to be disappointed, as once again a Hollywood spin removed the mystery of the previous plot and concocted a bizarre explanation for the events that unfolded on screen.

The remake is about a group of people who are taken to a house to take part in a sleep disorder study. They are then told about the house’s disturbing past  and the truth starts to unravel. However it unravels in an overly dramatic fashion, focusing on a storyline about children’s spirits being tortured. The malevolent spirit, Hugh Crane, was the focal point of this film, where as in the original the house was the main focus. It was more about the evil it manifested, rather than the character himself. The original film from 1963 was a classic tale of a haunted house, with the use of subtlety and suspense making it a real spine tingler.  On the other hand the remake doesn’t leave much to the imagination, relying more on special effects and well known actors (Liam Neeson what were you thinking!?) than a good plot to the detriment of the film.

A star studded failure.



Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

This last one was a toss up between remakes of what could be said is the horror film power three: Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween and Friday the 13th. I settled on the latest Nightmare on Elm Street instalment as I have always been a big Freddy Krueger fan. Wes Craven’s original film in 1984 sets the standard for the perfect horror movie bad guy.

Freddy is so evil and menacing, yet some how he always maintained a twisted charm. Since then however there have been so many sequels, spin offs, and remakes that for me the magic is beginning to be lost. Freddy Krueger is well known for his knife wielding and child killing antics as he tortures his victims while they dream. This version changes Freddy’s back story, which feels a little intrusive.  It focuses a lot more on Freddy as the child molester. It almost shows a vulnerable side to him at times, which takes away from his evil persona which we have all enjoyed getting a good scare from. It  also feels like the film makers couldn’t decide between a remake and a prequel.

Freddy doesn’t torment and play mind games with his victims as much as before, he goes straight in for the kill and the actual Elm Street where these crimes originally occurred isn’t really featured which is confusing. I think a quote I came across best describes this movie – ‘One, two, Freddy’s coming for you, three, four, we’ve seen it all before.’
    It seems that as long as there is money to be made, these classic movies will keep being remade. It is just a shame that this often comes at the expense of creativity as the end product frequently disappoints.