This is one of those classics that should be remade
-
ChefFlick — 17 years ago(August 07, 2008 12:19 AM)
I don't mind remakes,, they bring light to the originals, so we get rereleases of the old films.. besides with remakes, you can take them or leave them. You still have the original to watch..
and there have been remakes that have been better. "The Hills Have Eyes" for example.
but I don't understand why someone who hates remakes, and has never seen a good one, would like to see a remake,, seems like a contradiction. You pose an absolute, but then present an exception, Perhaps you mean you don't care for remakes in general.
http://www.myspace.com/mash1972 -
SaulGoodman — 17 years ago(February 20, 2009 02:13 PM)
I'm so glad someone already started this thread, it echoes my thoughts very closely.
This is such a great concept for a film and I did enjoy watching it but I felt there was so much more that could have been done with it. It's a short-film and in that time I felt there was a lot of 'dead-weight' where nothing was happening. Many of these scenes weren't atmospheric or well shot (in my opinion obviously).
There were beautiful moments that should be kept (the ending especially) and I can't imagine this film in colour. But I thought several areas could be developed for a good remake (not a trashy gorno piece of beep
1)Include a back story for Louise. Her history with Genessier and how he gave her a new face was intriguing.
2)More police work. I think if the police were more persistent in their investigations and sure of their suspicions there would be more suspense as they gathered evidence and closed in on Genessier. Note: Don't turn it into a freaky version of The Wire.
3)More character development for the victims, especially the shoplifter (can't recall her name). Again, this would build suspense and horror as the audience would have some attachment with them.
4)Scenes with Christine pre-car crash. Seeing her in her beautiful and vivacious glory would accent the tragedy of her loss and make her more sympathetic.
5) Leading on from point 4. Show her romance with Jacques. This would help realize the tragedy of their lost love.
I think all five points could be done tastefully (not in an in your face Hollywood way) and a superior film could be made while the integrity of the original would remain. -
adamsmo — 16 years ago(June 25, 2009 12:14 AM)
Wow, I don't know how you could consider this movie boring. It's a horror movie with major dramatic elements, a la George Romero horror and was insanely revolutionary in what it set out to do at the time.
I'm not OPPOSED to a remake, but it would have be done right - specifically and ideally done by an independent studio not out for a quick buck.
I disagree with the need for more thrills and action, though, I think more dramatic elements could be an improvement, though.
And can we really do a remake when face transplants actually work now? -
peep_show88 — 16 years ago(June 30, 2009 05:47 PM)
The movie plays more with drama than horror, really
I'm BORED I'm the Chairman of the Bored
My movies:
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list -
sigmundfreud79 — 13 years ago(December 06, 2012 07:18 AM)
The film is fine as it is; it tells the story wonderfully, is gorgeous to look at, haunting yet oddly touching in it's own way, has some great scares, and leaves you with some food for thought. A remake is completely unnecessary.
-
PoppyTransfusion — 12 years ago(May 21, 2013 01:37 PM)
I think the execution in Eyes without a Face is remarkable and feels contemporary. I don't think the film was concerned with suspense or thrills either. It is ambiguous through and through and offers us the character and story without explicit judgement for us to make decisions regarding.
Franju has said that he uses silent spaces in the film to create a sense of anxiety in the viewer and that anxiety is what makes for horror. One needs nothing more.
Keep silent unless what you are going to say is more important than silence. -
Vinnytt — 12 years ago(August 31, 2013 10:53 AM)
If Eyes Without a Face was remade in modern Hollywood:
-There would be a gratuitous dog murder scene
-They'd turn Christiane into a slasher character, and have her attacking innocents for no reason
-We'd see Louise shower, and this would be used to reveal her facial scars. Also, her tits. Because why not
-A useless side plot where the boyfriend doctor would go nuts thinking Christiane is still alive, and eventually attack Christianes father for no reason.
-The second girl would have also died before being saved. And she'd die screaming "NO DON'T KILL ME!" a thousand times
-It'd just be Saw.
Soplease don't remake this. Ever.
EDIT: I forgot that there would also be a overlong scene where it's told on the nose about the relationship between Christaine and her father. With flashbacks and a scene where she tells it to one of the captured girls. Or a dog. -
captaincracker — 12 years ago(October 30, 2013 05:47 PM)
The idea of a remake is horrible. The beauty behind this film lies in the way it was shot, edited, scored, and acted all things that, unless completely duplicated, would not do the original film justice. There have been other attempts at the story, but this movie stands alone.
Slashers, Splatters, & Giallos
http://captaincracker.blogspot.com/ -
NoseofNicko — 11 years ago(November 28, 2014 08:59 PM)
It was already remade in 1987:
http://www.imdb.com/board/10095125/reference
CG GORE IS THE WORST THING THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO THE HORROR GENRE!