Last House on the Left. Original Vs Remake

[samurainoir]

With so many of Wes Craven's films being remade, I was reading how this one might actually be closer to Craven's original vision given the budget and time restriction of the first one.

Just caught the remake and I can certainly say it does improve on the original "video nasty" in that they have given you more complex characters with much more at stake (without spoiling the major differences between them).

[Rextasy]

With so many of Wes Craven's films being remade, I was reading how this one might actually be closer to Craven's original vision given the budget and time restriction of the first one.

Just caught the remake and I can certainly say it does improve on the original "video nasty" in that they have given you more complex characters with much more at stake (without spoiling the major differences between them).

I've never been that big a fan of the original, but it does have that '70s griminess that filmmakers today can't recreate convincingly, and the villains are memorable (David Hess--'nuff said).

The remake is better than most neo-'70s horror movies of late, but that's not saying much. Some things that don't work: The head villain is too young and pretty-looking to be as heavy as he's supposed to be. The female villain is there just to get naked. The parents of the girl are completely unlikable and turn for no apparent reason from avengers to sadists. Oh, and that rousing but entirely out-of-character climax with the microwave.

[Cmonster]

I've never been that big a fan of the original, but it does have that '70s griminess that filmmakers today can't recreate convincingly

Yup.

SC

[ctc]

>it does have that '70s griminess that filmmakers today can't recreate convincingly

Yeah; that's been a problem I've had with a lot of remakes from the 70's. The originals were laden with depravity, violence and mayhem 'cos they were trying to bring folks in while having no budget. It created a weird effect where the baddies were actually loathesome.... but nowadays there's trend to skew closer to the "PG" market, to widen the audience. So a lot of newer films aren't really convincing.

Don C.

[cjefferys]

I've never been that big a fan of the original, but it does have that '70s griminess that filmmakers today can't recreate convincingly, and the villains are memorable (David Hess--'nuff said).

Exactly, that's one of the things that makes the original film as cool as it is (plus the villains played by David Hess and porn star/director Fred Lincoln). Haven't caught the remake yet, but morbid curiousity will probably make me check it out.

[samurainoir]

What do you guys think of the final fate of the daughter in the original vs the remake?

[ODBJBG]

I actually prefer the remake.

The original's goofy soundtrack takes away from the movie too much. The original was more graphic and I think they should have included a bit more of that violence in the remake, but the rest of the remake is superior. The whole Laurel & Hardy bit with the cops is a pointless sideplot, the acting is terrible, etc...

The remake is like, they took the good idea from a crappy 70's exploitation flick and tried to turn it into a real movie.

Neither movie is great, mind you, but one is like a bad film school borderline Troma movie and the remake is a decent little film.