05-17-2010, 05:48 AM
<!--quoteo(post=362843:date=May 16 2010, 08:30 PM:name=DAKAZA)<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE (DAKAZA @ May 16 2010, 08:30 PM) <a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=362843\"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class=\'quotemain\'><!--quotecWhere did you find this "objective" criteria? It sounds like a subjective system that you designed yourself. Movies simply aren't that easy to categorize. People have different ideas of what classic means. Sometimes critics consider only the era in which a movie was filmed. You might find this link interesting: <a href=\"http://www.classicfilmguide.com/\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.classicfilmguide.com/</a> Also, many elitist film critics scorn horror movies in general. I've seen debates online about whether the original NOES was even a true classic. By the way, I think it's arrogant to call Rob Zombie a "hack". In my opinion he's a very creative, gifted artist. The Devil's Rejects was an imaginative, entertaining movie and many people agree with me. I also liked his other flicks...including Halloween. Artists always have influences that inspire them and it's only natural that these manifest in their work at some level. Zombie loves the 70's era of horror and he works diligently to bring that vibe to his movies.<!--QuoteEnd</div><!--QuoteEEndI agree with you two on different levels but I would not say that either of you are more wrong or more right. I don't think that Rob Zombie is a "hack" as people like to call him nowadays but I didn't enjoy his sequel to his remake of Halloween very much either. He could have made the film just like the original sequel but he tried his best to come up with new and inventive kills/ events that either worked great (stomping the guys face) or worked horribly (the gratuitous use of the word 'coonoodle' especially in the very beginning after the COW! COW! COW!) either way you can't hate on him too much for trying something new, plus he was pressured to turn out these scripts very fast. That being said I am not a 'RZ lover' I'm just saying that people hate on remakes that are too much of the same but hate on ones that are too different...so it's really hard to please everyone.I actually find it ironic that you liked the remake of The Ring, while you dissed the remake of TCM. I really think Nispel made a great TCM remake and Leatherface looks badass in it. It was only gorey in a few scenes maybe? Plus its The Texas Chainsaw Massacre! It should be gorey anyways. The original is awesome don't get me wrong but I equally enjoy the remake for different reasons. I just don't think the Ring was a superior film at all really, all the jump cutting editing, wasn't scary to me at all and in fact I think it's a very overrated film.If my long rant shows anything, it shows that a lot of it is based on opinion BUT I will say that there is no denying that the original ANOES is a far superior film than the remake. The biggest reason being is that all the scenes that were nearly reshot exactly were not nearly as effective and in fact were done in a worse, less creepy way than the original. They need to seriously leave that CGI alone, or try harder because golly gee willikers that freddy comming out of the wall scene was retarded looking. Watch the original and see how real filmmaking is done.Thats my two cents.