|
Post by kims on Aug 26, 2023 20:08:08 GMT
Robert Birchard was a film editor and film historian. He writes that in 1925 and earlier, if one studio sold the rights to a film to another for the purpose of a remake, the remake studio received all the original film production elements. The purpose was so that the original could not compete with the remake. Many of the original films were then destroyed by the remake studio.
Another reason some films disappeared.
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 26, 2023 20:36:51 GMT
Robert Birchard was a film editor and film historian. He writes that in 1925 and earlier, if one studio sold the rights to a film to another for the purpose of a remake, the remake studio received all the original film production elements. The purpose was so that the original could not compete with the remake. Many of the original films were then destroyed by the remake studio. Another reason some films disappeared. If you think about it, the newer versions always do compete with the earlier ones. When Steven Spielberg remade WEST SIDE STORY, it existed largely in the shadow of the original. It's inevitable that viewers will compare the two, especially if the original is a highly revered classic.
I don't think we'll ever see a remake of CITIZEN KANE, CASABLANCA or GONE WITH THE WIND because anything that gets produced now would still be eclipsed by those well-known originals.
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Aug 26, 2023 20:43:51 GMT
Robert Birchard was a film editor and film historian. He writes that in 1925 and earlier, if one studio sold the rights to a film to another for the purpose of a remake, the remake studio received all the original film production elements. The purpose was so that the original could not compete with the remake. Many of the original films were then destroyed by the remake studio. Another reason some films disappeared. If you think about it, the newer versions always do compete with the earlier ones. When Steven Spielberg remade WEST SIDE STORY, it existed largely in the shadow of the original. It's inevitable that viewers will compare the two, especially if the original is a highly revered classic.
I don't think we'll ever see a remake of CITIZEN KANE, CASABLANCA or GONE WITH THE WIND because anything that gets produced now would still be eclipsed by those well-known originals. I think all this ⇧ is correct, but if the remake is of a minor classic or a not-famous movie, the relationship is more symbiotic as, if the new version is successful, it will cause some to go back to see the older version. I think "A Star is Born" falls into this category as the several older version are respected, but not generally beloved classics, so the new one of a few years back, probably, gave the old versions a bump in interest. I have friends who know I'm into "old movies" and a few of them asked me which one(s) they should see after they saw and liked the new version.
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 26, 2023 20:56:56 GMT
If you think about it, the newer versions always do compete with the earlier ones. When Steven Spielberg remade WEST SIDE STORY, it existed largely in the shadow of the original. It's inevitable that viewers will compare the two, especially if the original is a highly revered classic.
I don't think we'll ever see a remake of CITIZEN KANE, CASABLANCA or GONE WITH THE WIND because anything that gets produced now would still be eclipsed by those well-known originals. I think all this ⇧ is correct, but if the remake is of a minor classic or a not-famous movie, the relationship is more symbiotic as, if the new version is successful, it will cause some to go back to see the older version. I think "A Star is Born" falls into this category as the several older version are respected, but not generally beloved classics, so the new one of a few years back, probably, gave the old versions a bump in interest. I have friends who know I'm into "old movies" and a few of them asked me which one(s) they should see after they saw and liked the new version. Right, it's not always a negative relationship that occurs between the remake and the earlier version. In some cases, it's easy to see why the studios have undertaken a new version, because advances in technology mean the later production will be able to entice the audience in a way that the previous version(s) could not...and as you say, this may cause people to go back and see what came before.
I think something else that plays into it is what version you the viewer might watch first. If you grew up loving a later version, because its release was aimed at your generation, you will feel some attachment and nostalgia towards it. Then you watch the earlier film, and you may appreciate that, but it still won't hold the same sentimental value.
|
|