We were discussing this yesterday after the film. Several of us were of the opinion that the remake was actually better (not to say that the original was bad just not quite as good as the remake). I know a lot of people hate the remake though so I was wondering what everyone else thought.
I haven’t seen the remake, but my theory is that most will prefer whichever they saw first.
I agree with the Mac, but also think that in these modern times where gore is thrown at us, many of these tension building films don’t have the impact that they otherwise could have had.
I would disagree with that. I think with so much gore thrown at us, we are somewhat desensitised to the extent that many gore-fests seem quite comical. Tension-builders are rare and quite effective (when they’re done well).
final destination films - were they meant to be comedies??
Yes. :? Though admittedly the third failed tremendously at that.
I went for the remake (it was the one I saw first). They’re actually both very similar films but the remake makes one or two minor changes that I prefer. In the remake there’s a brief glimpse of something horrific when they show you people killed by the girl which I felt bought the build up in tension to a better climax. Also the characters in the remake can’t read minds (I tend to find too many supernatural ideas make the film too abstract which is never good for horror).
I tend to think gore detracts from the tension as it rarely seems real. However, I liked how it was done in The Ring remake since a brief glance meant it was more your imagination than what you saw.