![]() This Poltergeist is more indicative of Kenan’s aim to please than his considerable skill. But just as you sometimes need something to eat, you sometimes also only need something to watch.Īs such non-nutritive substances go, director Gil Kenan and Pulitzer Prize-winning screenwriter David Lindsay-Abaire’s revision of Poltergeist is reminiscent of 2006’s Poseidon or 2005’s The Amityville Horror - a significantly shorter simulacrum that works on its own single-serving terms. Plus, the original remains one of the gnarliest PG-rated films and far more intense than its PG-13 counterpart. It’s not as if dozens of other movies not called Poltergeist haven’t traded on its merits for 33 years. On its face, a rejiggered Poltergeist seems like a light-the-lights-or-lose-the-rights remake. ![]() As the world turns, so do the gas station hot dogs. Perhaps, under desperation or duress, it’s you. You know they sit there all day, rotating and reheating until they only chemically resemble meat. Mostly, the majority settle for acceptable mediocrity and / or mimicry of what made something popular in the first place.Īsking why, then, studios would even bother is like asking why gas stations sell hot dogs. A few implement a modicum of new-spin momentum that neither sullies nor substitutes the original. A small handful genuinely, and unconditionally, suck. The bottom line with remakes or reboots is that we occasionally receive a kickass gift we’ve coveted for years. Rape is not the sort of act that any movie performs on your childhood. Not even the worst reboot can erase your precious memories or a film you love. Most people’s scorched-earth fulminations against remakes or reboots of iconic movies from their youth fade the further they are from adolescence or, at the very least, a cover of online anonymity.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |