KVH Blog: Remakes, Sequels, and MORE! - Fear FestEVIL
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-15228,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-title-hidden,qode-theme-ver-6.1,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.3.5,vc_responsive

28 Oct KVH Blog: Remakes, Sequels, and MORE!

Hey monster movie freaks,

I know this is my blog but I want it to be interactive. So my question this time is: What’s your opinions on horror remakes? My opinion on remakes is that they are mostly watered down and made more accessible, which therefore equals an inferior product in my mind. The only remake that I think qualifies itself as worth being done was John Carpenter’s The Thing over the original The Thing but it stops there!

It stops in the early ‘80s. There’s no reason to remake The Evil Dead, no reason to remake The Thing again, no need to remake Poltergeist, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Halloween, just no reason! A lot of remakes seem to go for splatter over content, and that isn’t always best. Even when that isn’t the case, like with Psycho, the original is pure genius and can I really expect a remake to be better than Alfred Hitchcock’s? I’m highly skeptical.

Kirk Von Hammett Remakes

Now don’t get me wrong. Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, is brilliant, one of my favorite movies and contains plenty of classic gore…but it isn’t a remake! Same with Halloween 3, I love it but it’s not at all connected to Halloween or the sequel.

So I want to hear everyone’s opinions on this, are my views fair or am I just being an elitist asshole on the subject?

Speaking of sequels (which I was with TCM2) I have not seen Sinister 2 or Insidious 3. I liked the first Sinister, I thought the main protagonist was cool and looked like he had just walked off a Norwegian black metal stage, and I’m interested to know how it holds up. But again, I am suspicious of movies with part two, threes and fours, etc..so let me know if you’ve seen it, and also Insidious, where I didn’t  see 2 yet.

Kirk Von Hammett Sequels

Let me know if these sequels are worth the time!

I mention this and some wise-ass has just told me I wouldn’t remake any horror movie, which isn’t true! I would remake one if I felt I could improve upon to or do something different. It’s like the attitude we have to covering songs. Some bands tend to cover songs exactly like the original, and the thought I always have is ‘does the world really need another version which is a xerox copy of the original?’ in my mind the answer is no. My approach (and the band’s approach) is to interpret it to make something of it and bring something different to the table, like a new arrangement or a new guitar solo.

That’s my attitude toward movies, I’d would remake a bunch of 30s and 40s movies only if I felt things could be improved. I’d remake The Black Cat and I’d make sure it was much more satanic, I’d also remake Invasion Of The Saucer-Men, and I’d put a more mature spin on it. The aliens are killer, eyes on their hands, needles on their fingertips that inject alcohol into their victims, and I would give that a modern make-over. It would have to be in color, I would definitely improve on the plot and I would open the movie up more. When you watch it, there’s basically two or three scenes and locations, I would open the planet of origin, it would have a lot more action and the finale would be great! I would like to remake The She-Creaure too. I would stay faithful to the way the monsters look but modernize them ever so slightly.

Kirk Von Hammett Classics

What I’ve Been Watching

I saw a really great sci-fi film called Time Lapse, thoroughly enjoyed it, and I’m looking forward to seeing The Martian. One movie I watched again which I hadn’t seen for a long time, was John Carpenter’s In The Mouth Of Madness starring Sam Neil, which came out in ‘94 and it’s just an epic! It’s not HP Lovecraft’s original stories but it has HP leanings. Annabelle was pretty good, and there seems to be a sub-genre of haunted puppet/ventriloquist doll films, Magic is the greatest of all those, but Annabelle has good flavor of that sort of thing and I’d say it’s worth checking out.


Finally, I’d like to answer a question from ELIZABETH WILLIAMS who wanted to know if I had seen What We Do In The Shadows and what I thought of it as she ‘loved it’ (Elizabeth also said she loves The Shining). I loved it, I thought it was hilarious and I think it is an important movie in that it shows a side of vampires that isn’t usually thought about. When you first become a vampire there’s all this stuff you have to think about. The guy wasn’t good at flying, wasn’t good at tapping a vein and the line ‘why do you like virgins’ gives up the best line in the film, ‘It’s like if you eat a sandwich you wanna know if anyone has fucked it or not.’ I also love that the old Nosferatu has a ‘modern’ name with a twist, isn’t it Pyter? Or Brian? Something like that. And yes, I love The Shining as a movie and a book, I have to go on record as saying that the book and the movie are two different stories, each one carries its own huge merits. Stanley Kubrick is one of the best directors to ever have lived, and some of the best things he’s done have been his horror and sci-fi films, 2001 – A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange. Kubrick was a master at establishing mood and atmosphere. What I loved about The Shining was the feeling of emptiness and claustrophobia, I felt like I was right there in the hotel itself.

Okay, that’s my take on everything now give me yours!

Hope you enjoy this blog as much as I’m enjoying doing it, see you next time with more pearls of wisdom about all things sinister!


  • Toni Partin
    Posted at 17:22h, 29 October

    I’ll put my two cents in. My family has a bit of a twisted sense of humor. My dad started us on horror movies when we were in elementary school. He would sneak and pick us up from school and take us to a matinee to see some movie. I think my first movie was the Quadermas Experiment…I called it “the man with the cactus hand” ha. You think of funny names when you’re little. Not sure if you would consider that a horror film, but when you’re like 8 it is one. Then there was Halloween, scared the crap out of me but dad said if I told my mother he wouldn’t take me to anymore, so I never did, thus starting the horror obsession. Dad really like the Karloff and Lugosi films. We make dad’s birthday somewhat amusing – we have made meatloaf that look like charred hands, severed head birthday cake,, chopped off fingers, cake writing with “I’m not dead yet! Happy 72nd” or whatever, and we really enjoy coming up with obscure ideas. Its funny and he gets a kick out of it.

    With regards to remakes, not a big fan. They do take away from the feel of the original movies and most are disappointing. Anyone would be crazy to even attempt to remake Rob Zombies “House of 1000 Corpses”.. I don’t know how people decide what they want to remake. The Shining is one of my all time favs. A Clockwork Orange is also up there, pretty far out! I have a long list of them over the years. It appears the movies these days are about the blood and gore and not the gory suspense…doesn’t always have to be blood and guts to make it a horror flick. What did you think of the Saw series? Curious. some of those creeped me out.

    I do however have a movie question for Kirk! We have been wracking our brains trying to remember the name of this movie, old black and white, a woman is in a wheelchair and gets kidnapped or abducted by these people in her house. they torment the hell out of her. but she escapes. She has knives or scalpels in her eyes, and she drags herself to the road and ends up getting run over by a car. I cannot remember the actress, but its driving me crazy!!!!! any clues?

  • Burl Ravenscroft
    Posted at 00:15h, 30 October

    I just watched the original The Fly last night and was really happy with the classic suspense / horror / drama of it. But surely that remake deserves to be up there with The Thing, eh?

    And I love the Hammer remakes of Dracula and the Mummy. Modern remakes are the big problem. PG-13 rated and all the blood is black because you can’t show the real deal? Feh.

  • Chris Katilius
    Posted at 16:32h, 30 October

    The cult horror movies have stood the test of time due to this one thing…no…fucking…CGI! Yes it is more expensive and time consuming to make movies like “nightmare on elm street.” And “the Texas chainsaw massacre.” It was scary because they used pigs blood or corn syrup. This CGI computer animated stuff is just lame. That is what is killing these remakes. When you mentioned, “watered down.” Its the CGI. The only decent horror movies I have seen in the past 12 years have been rob zombies movies. Not the Halloween remakes! Im not a fan of remakes. They do this because they know it will bring in money and CGI is cheap to use. So why not remake everything? Im still pissed about Rob fucking up Halloween and Bruce fucking up the Evil Dead remake. Thats my opinion. That and a buck fifty will buy you a coke. Happy Halloween Kirk!

  • Michael Lynch
    Posted at 16:40h, 30 October


    Remakes too often are just a “cash and grab” where they don’t care about making a better film. They just care about bait and switch, so they can take your money.

    The Shinning is my favorite horror film because as you said Kubrick is one of the greatest Director’s of all time.

    The film industry needs an overhaul. The business people are ruining the art. They continue to believe if they put such and such name in the film it’ll make money yet films are bombing every weekend. They are bombing because this old business model needs an update.

    All great films that have done well were great stories first. Content is king. And you said it more blood and gore means nothing if we are connected to the characters.

    Sequels of they are actually planned out and carefully crafted can be great. That is what great television is doing right now. Keeping a story going with characters that we fall in love with.

    As a viewer we can fall in love with the characters and want to see there arcs continue to grow. Or we fall in love with the world that filmmaker created and want to get lost in it again.

    I hear the movie the ROOM that just came out is supposed to be amazing. (It’s not a horror film but it’s supposed to be incredibly acted and crafted).

    When we do watch films and pay for them we are voting for them. Which is why these remakes keep happening is people keep watching them. Another reason it’s good to support independent film that is creating amazing art.

    I work in the film business so I could go on and on. But in summery I agree with you. Stop the remakes. If you can’t do it better leave it alone and create something else.

  • Tim Garrish
    Posted at 16:41h, 30 October

    I agree with most of what you say about sequels. A lot of them just turn into franchises which gradually dilute what was a great idea , eventually to the point of making the whole thing ridiculous ( Jason in space for example ) The Saw series is another one that was stretched to thin and just became a series of set piece torture shots in the end.
    With remakes its a symptom of the times in the old days the violence was more implied than actually seen. The classic being the shower scene in psycho you never saw the body just the knife and the blood. In any modern version you would see the whole deal and unfortunately that somehow takes away the horror, we’ve seen it all before. Most great horror takes place in your head in your imagination. Which is why to this day I prefer reading the books to watching the movies.

  • Marcel de Souza
    Posted at 16:52h, 30 October

    I would ask if David Cronenberg’s The Fly was not a remake… I am sure. If it is, it’s a great one. Kirk, no love for Robie Zombie’s Halloween remake? I think it’s decent, but no way better than the original. Cheers!!

  • Amber DelGrego
    Posted at 16:59h, 30 October

    I feel like this is the diary of a psychotic mad man. Speaking of sequels that are different from the first, try Troll and Troll 2.

  • Chad Lutzke
    Posted at 17:00h, 30 October

    Hey Kirk, you forgot The Fly, man! Cronenberg did us good with that one!

  • Koren Miller
    Posted at 17:03h, 30 October

    I just watched the extended version of the latest Poltergeist….dare I say it…remake?! I have to admit that I thoroughly enjoyed it. I enjoyed the fact that it was an M rating and that it was the extension of your own imagination and associations with childhood and current fears that did the rest of the work. There was the anticipation of what could happen that lifted scenes to a whole new level. Yes…there were at times slightly cheesy moments, but I think these added to the overall flow and charm of the movie.

  • Steve DeBord
    Posted at 17:10h, 30 October

    I’m in agreement with you there Kirk. Not only to most of the sequels water down or change the original but for the most part they suck! lol I think that’s true for all genres not just horror. Why try to remake something that is a classic and tarnish its reputation? An good example was the last Godzilla movie.. What a disappointment! lol ! Keep on rocking brutha! haven’t seen you in awhile but maybe I’ll catch up again with you one day before were both old and retired.. 🙂

  • Ron M.
    Posted at 10:18h, 30 October

    Hello Kirk & Horror Fans!

    Great question! My first thought in being such a big KVH Fan is, Kirk, how come you haven’t Executive Produced any horror films?? This may be a really great way to make history doing a horror film (or remake) your way. You have the fan base and I’m sure it would be well received. Please email me to chat more on that later =)

    Being in the movie business now for 25 years you can imagine how I’ve seen movies get made, or not. In my experience, many films have become run by Accountants. Lets get this cast, this Director, and market it this way and we are likely to make “X” amount of money. It’s sad truth. The good news is people with talent and money can do it their way with more control.
    Sequels just ring the cash register to Studios that make them. They already have a built in audience, often times the cast is mostly unknown and will work for a much lower rate. And… many are filmed in other states or countries with big tax incentives and/or severely cheaper costs.
    The VFX are often sourced out to other countries for very cheap, and this is why the widespread use of bad VFX are running rampant through films today. I think the balance of real or practical FX are a must and have been lost in most of todays films. And finally, quality camera and production equipment are affordable and accessible to EVERYONE now, so everyone has a film. This tends to saturate the market and that means Buyers are much more particular about what they purchase/license.

    Ok, ok, but what about the story? Again sadly often times the story is fifth on the list of other important factors that allow the project to actually get made. There are exceptions to everything I’m talking about. Again, this is just my experience. The exceptions I speak of are more like a lottery. There’s a few winners, and lots of losers. I know lots of people who made their “passion project” that lost money or got screwed.

    This is why I’ve always felt Kirk is a great candidate to make a successful horror film that the fans would embrace.


  • Andina Yazzie
    Posted at 10:18h, 30 October

    No, I think if it is a classic then leave it. I get the whole remake buzz but nothing beats a classic. It’s like American heavy metal…73 Chevy Nova can not be compared to a 15 Chevy sedan, come on really. Classics are classics enjoy them like they are. This is just my opinion to a question that has many answers.

  • Jizzlobber Jim
    Posted at 10:40h, 30 October

    The Rob Zombie version of Halloween was pretty good.

  • linda lautenberger
    Posted at 10:45h, 30 October

    Remakes and sequelsin any genre frequently suck ass. Honestly, i prefer to read the book. I did see insidious 2 and found it stimulating. A remake i loathed was Carrie. WTF was that? It was insulting to the original if you ask me. Thats my two cents. Happy Halloween! Te amo.

  • Scott Cowan
    Posted at 10:45h, 30 October

    I’m a huge fan of the Evil Dead series and thought the remake was spectacular. I love Sam Raimi and his horror films. I had always envisioned the evil dead as being seriously dark so the remake was spot on. The Thing with Kurt Russell was a fucking masterpiece. The utter isolation of that film was intense.

  • Scott Cowan
    Posted at 10:48h, 30 October

    You’re my favorite guitarist Kirk. Metal on Kirk!

  • Josh Amolsch
    Posted at 10:59h, 30 October

    You should direct your own original movie man!

  • Maria Belo
    Posted at 11:08h, 30 October

    Hey Kirk!

    I really like your insight regarding this issue. I think the whole remake thing is just a marketing strategy. It’s not a surprise that Hollywood has been leaking some bad horror stuff lately. One person that still comes up with something more or less original is James Wan. He entered the spotlight with the Saw saga, but many things he’s done ever since are solid. Have you seen The Conjuring? Yes, it’s about demons and possession, but it’s so nicely done that you don’t even care. Another film that is HIGHLY underrated is The Babadook. I advice you to check it out!

    I reckon you didn’t appreciate The Mummy’s 1999 remake. Considering I was born in 1993, I kind of had to put up with a lot of remakes like The Mummy (1999) and I won’t say I didn’t like it. It was enjoyable enough, but classics are still classics. And I agree with you when you mention some suspicion when it comes to sequels. The Exorcist is still to this day my all time favorite piece! What an amazing movie that was. Unfortunately spoiled with prequels and sequels… Ever since, I cannot name ONE movie that revolves around exorcisms and possession (maybe The Conjuring, but still) that had me tied to the screen like The Exorcist has.

    And The Poltergeist remake was a pain to watch. I almost laughed at some parts, because horror movies nowadays are just so much below par that it starts feeling as if I’m watching a comedy.

    Speaking of Sinister: it’s rare for me to watch horror movies twice unless I really, REALLY enjoy them. Sinister is one of those movies! It’s beautifully done and there are some parts that make me flinch every time! I haven’t seen the sequel yet (and I’m actually afraid). As for the Insidious movies…. the first was very good, the second was average and the third…. well, I guess it’s bound to be a failure when you stretch a plot this far. It happened with the Saw saga… why make seven movies? It’s just a cheap way to make money in my opinion, because people who’ve seen the first ones are curious to see the next installment, and so the money making machine never stops….

    Anyway, there are still some gems to be found nowadays, but sometimes you have to dig deep to find them. I’ve seen almost every horror film classic, and I suppose people that enjoy this genre so much as I do become more skeptical and want better material. I guess it’s a curse!

    Happy Halloween from Portugal!

  • Rory Mckane
    Posted at 11:40h, 30 October

    I actually thought the Evil Dead remake was good, especially as I’d not seen anything gory with a good budget in recent memory; I also enjoyed the darker tone, and I’ve never seen a chainsaw scene as good as that ending! Other than that the Dawn remake was enjoyable, but just rewatched that and didn’t hold up great!

    With regards to recent sequels, Insidious 3 I thought was the best out of the three, much darker and way better than Insidious 2!

    Found footage can be really enjoyable, but things like The Gallows seem to drag the sub genre right back to zero! Unfriended was a lot better than I was expecting and The Visit was better than I was hoping for.

  • Luisana Rivera
    Posted at 12:26h, 30 October

    I don’t think you’re being an elitist asshole Kirk. I just think you’re a true fan of horror movies and can distinguish the good from the bad. As far as Halloween, no remake can stand up to the original in my opinion. Everything about it is perfect, the music the camera angles…everything. Same with Hellraiser, pt. 1 is so trippy, sick and twisted that anything after that just doesn’t measure up. Maybe I need to change my way of thinking about horror movies. I would love to hear your take on Clive Barkers masterpiece….

  • Justin Harris
    Posted at 12:52h, 30 October

    On the whole, I have to agree that most horror re-makes (re-imaginings, re-boots, etc.) are garbage. I’m a fan of ’70s and ’80s slashers, and the remakes of TCM, Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, etc. have been devoid of any character. While there will always be a few exceptions to every rule (the aforementioned Cronenberg “The Fly”, and “The Thing” being the obvious standouts), there is something inherently special about the relationship between low-budget and horror. When you read about the making of the originals, what often stands out is the passion of all parties involved in the production. These people work through budgetary constraints to achieve their vision using raw energy, creativity, ingenuity, determination, and faith. When a film is re-made and backed by a major studio, I think in a lot of cases money puts the film makers on a plane where there is significantly less struggle and thought involved. If you’re working with ostensibly unlimited resources, then there may be a lack of personal investment. It’s kinda like if your parents buy you a brand new car when you get your driver’s license, you may not appreciate it and have as much emotional investment in it as a kid that has to flip burgers all summer long just to save up the cash for a down payment on second-hand beater. When that kid gets the keys to the car he worked his ass off for, it’s going to be the greatest day of his life because he earned it on his terms.

    There is a caveat, of course. Some horror films with large budgets can turn out really well, if they are in the hands of a masterful film maker. The Shining excelled because Kubrick knew how to create a beautifully nuanced, large-scale film. The original Poltergeist was great because Tobe Hooper learned how to get what he wanted on film despite budget, and because Spielberg has a deep understanding of family dynamics and how children view the world around them. Most of the remakes (Poltergeist, Halloween, FT13th, NoES, etc.) are completely tone-deaf, in terms of emotion, suspense, and character. There is no subtlety, no personality, no craft, and no humanity. Everything is on “10” (or “11”, because we all love Tufnel) all the time. Without a sense of dynamic shift, things become noise. Noise for art’s sake is fine, but noise for noise’s sake is exhausting and annoying. As a slasher fan, it seems absurd to make these critiques, but you cannot argue with the fact that those cheesy bloodbaths from 30 years ago had a certain feeling and “texture” all their own.

  • Aron Gagliard
    Posted at 12:59h, 30 October

    Kirk and Fiends,

    Great comments from everyone.

    I hardly ever bother with modern remakes. And if I do it can never tarnish my love of the original.

    Sequels on the other hand can often be enjoyable, to a point. Or in the case of Bride of Frankenstein, dare I say, better than the original.

    Besides, there are always a handful of great new horror films every year that rise to the surface.

    Happy Halloween gang!

  • Gman
    Posted at 13:16h, 30 October

    Insidious 3, well worth a watch dude. I thought it was up there with the first one, maybe better? Anyway, check it out for yourself as like you, sequels usually disappoint me. Cheers, Gman.

  • April.aka morgie
    Posted at 13:49h, 30 October

    While I agree with what you wrote, I loved Rob Zombies remake of Halloween. Gave. different twist to the original which i loved.
    Some of the older movies could be done better. However I love the old films that left the gore up to your own imagination! My mind makea things 100 times more gory than anything I have seen on film lol!
    Another remake I have enjoyed is The Haunting. I have seen the original and the remake and gotta say I love em both!

  • Matt Rowley
    Posted at 14:00h, 30 October

    I think remakes are needed and are a good thing. Simple reason is because its a great way to attract people to the genre.

    Hopefully, they will watch the old stuff, then they will watch more old stuff, that will prompt remakes of those films which will then attract more people in.

    I suppose it’s a bit like cover songs really… for example, I would never have listened to Misfits or Diamond Head if it weren’t for Metallica covering them first.


  • mikeal
    Posted at 14:05h, 30 October

    You are an elitist as whole but you’re allowed to be because you’re not a newbie, I never heard turn the page by Bob seagar and I liked your guyses ‘version better but some elitist assholes I heard say it’s not good, but since I’m a not a music buff I don’t care, same with non horror buffs, some might like the remake and hate the original or get turned on to the original and like that better. It’s all good! 🙂

  • craig stephenson
    Posted at 14:36h, 30 October

    Hey krk, Been a BIG fan of yours since I was 7 im 39 now..
    Love your book..I can really relate to a lot of your views on horror movies.,
    I don’t know if you’ve seen this but it’s a great horror movie.
    It’s called “Found”. its one of the best horror movie ive seen in a while.
    There is a sequal called “Headless” .they are both fairly new movies.
    Keep up the GREAT work.!!!Happy Halloween to you and yer family.!!—sincerely—craig s.

  • Andy Sloan
    Posted at 14:42h, 30 October

    Hey Kirk, my opinion is most re-makes are shit, and the tendancy to make sequel after sequel to squeeze every last drop of money outta the fans is terrible. But my main point is…When are you gonna make a movie Kirk? I would imagine that your legion of fans would kill to see what lurks in the darkest corners of your horror obsessed mind! Now, it’s my birthday today (30th October) so please respond!!! People saying “Happy Halloween” is a bit shit too so, Horrific Halloween Everybody!!!

  • Larry LaBrie
    Posted at 14:53h, 30 October


    1. Grazt on the blog. I dig it. Keep it coming.
    2. Boo on remakes. Unless you can bring something new, keep the integrity, or show another point of view. I think some shoot for this goal, and often fall short. Money is probably plays the biggest role in these remakes; their intent and their success or failure.
    3. Let the Right One In = Tops my list of vampire movies. The book = nasty; glad they didn’t follow it closely. Let Me In (American remake)= brought nothing new to the table.
    4. I’d love to see a good flippin’ werewolf movie made; I always have to go back to American Werewolf, Wolfen, and the Howling to get my fix.
    5. Sidenote – I read Blue Bird by Bukowski. I saw you at the last Festevil and you told me you dug it. Yeah, it’s memorable. Says a lot. I dig it too.

    Looking forward to the next Festevil. Cheers ~

    • craig stephenson
      Posted at 17:54h, 30 October

      There a new werewolf movie out called “Howl” its ok. not as good as “the howling” personally my very favorite movie of all time.The f/x are superb .Best transformation ever.

      • Larry LaBrie
        Posted at 17:48h, 01 November

        Right on. I’ll have to check out Howl.

  • Miguel Angel Diaz
    Posted at 15:25h, 30 October

    Right on metal brother. Directors should leave classic horror flicks alone. Create their own original fright-mare flick instead of copying someone elses hard work.\,,/

  • Simon Hill
    Posted at 15:32h, 30 October

    KIRK YOU MUST WATCH INSIDIOUS 3!!! It’s as good as the first film and it doesn’t even feel like a sequel. By the way, I think the filmmakers deliberately made the first ten minutes look awful to play a trick on the viewer! Soon after this, it becomes scary as hell!

  • barry millar
    Posted at 17:01h, 30 October

    hello kirk i agree with what you said that remakes are never a good idea my favourite horror movie is dawn of the dead i watched the 2004 remake a few weeks ago i thought it was good but nothing beats the original did you ever see the remake? if so what did you think of it? love your book by the way you have a good knowledge of all things horror im also a big metallica fan happy halloween from belfast n.ireland

  • barry millar
    Posted at 17:09h, 30 October

    hello kirk i agree remakes are never a good idea my favourite horror movie is dawn of the dead i watched the 2004 remake a few weeks ago i really liked it have you ever seen the remake?if so what did you think? love your book by the way you have a good knowledge of all things horror happy halloween

  • Brandon
    Posted at 18:16h, 30 October

    The original is a classic, but I love how Rob Zombie added another dimension to Michael Myers, while staying pretty true to the main storylines.

  • Rich Freitas
    Posted at 20:21h, 30 October

    The man with 9 brains!! LET’S DO THIS!! I don’t like remakes.

  • Ethan Larudee
    Posted at 23:17h, 30 October

    Yeah. Pretty right on the point of the subject. There are a lot of remakes that don’t need to be done. The TCM new ones are good. Too much gore like you said can be stupid. There are a lot of new stupid plot horror movies that just go nowhere and really piss me off. You ever seen this movie called Boogieman. I’ll say the very beginning is cool like for the first five minutes. Then nothing happens in the whole damn movie, even the end is bullshit. What do you think of Jeepers Creepers? I give it thumbs up. 1 and 2. There’s this movie called Tooth Fairy. Had some creepy parts though I didn’t get to finish it. There’s a pretty cool movie called Devil. Takes place in an elevator. I thought it was pretty cool. I think if you feel like you have some good ideas to make some remakes and make them scary it’s cool. Right on and wait to check out some more a your cool stuff. One

  • Eliza Woodward
    Posted at 06:40h, 31 October

    Hi Kirk!
    I agree with remakes being utterly pointless. You’re not alone with that, my question to you: What did you think of Freddy vs Jason?? I loved most of Nightmare on elm streets and the friday the 13th movies (With Kane Hodder as Jason) but unsure about them going head to head. Probably just me. Insidious was ok. What is your opinion on The Amityville Horror 2005 remake if you’ve seen it?

  • Bob O'Rourke
    Posted at 07:55h, 31 October

    First off, yes Kirk, definitely check out Insidious 3! If you liked the first two, you gotta follow the rest of the story….it continues nicely with the first two and was an overall great time!

    Speaking of remakes, I gotta agree with you on John Carpenter’s The Thing….perfect film front to back really! Along with that one, though, I’d also include David Cronenberg’s The Fly. Both of these remakes took a generally simple premise that may have been considered campy and explored different avenues that the originals maybe missed or overlooked. Also agree about stuff from the 80s (and 70s as far as I’m concerned) needing to stop being remade…there’s no reason for it. Although, I did enjoy the Hills Have Eyes remake and its sequel!

    As far as sequels go . . . it’s tricky, because as a Horror fan, I will ALWAYS go see a sequel no matter how bad the previous one may have been. I think most Horror fans would agree that we’ll always turn up with the hopes that “maybe they’ll get it right next time” (I’m looking at you Halloween!). Although, when it comes to direct-to-video garbage Sequels In Name Only, I’ve gotta draw the line! hahah. My favorite sequels take a premise that was set-up with the original and expand on it, often times surpassing their predecessors.

    Dawn of the Dead is my all-time favorite film . . . in my opinion, it takes everything that was terrifying about Night of the Living Dead (itself, a perfect film) and blows it up into full-color, splashy FUN. Maybe it’s that I grew up in the 80s/90s, but I always thought Dawn was scarier.

    Bride of Frankenstein . . . a perfect blueprint of a sequel as far as I’m concerned. Again, takes everything that was great about the original and not only continues the story, but adds humor and makes it fun.

    A Nightmare on Elm Street 3 (and ANOES 4 and 5) . . . Nightmare 3 is a perfect sequel, too. I’ve often referred compared it to, say, Master of Puppets, in that it was still sort of underground and the hardcore Horror fans knew about it, but the mainstream was starting to catch on to Freddy and embrace him. And, even though they may not be popular amongst all fans, I LOVE the trilogy of Nightmare 3, Nightmare 4, and Nightmare 5 because of the continuity and overall story arc in those films.

    Speaking of continuity in sequels . . . Halloween and even Friday the 13th kinda painted themselves into corners by continuing story arcs that kinda went nowhere (the Thorn angle in Halloween, for example). Ever wondered why we’ve never really seen any Horror franchises more akin to the James Bond franchise? I mean, I’d be interested to see a new Friday the 13th film that just starts off with Jason being back and in a new adventure…don’t really need to see a recap of the previous film and how/why he comes back in the new one — he just is alive and collecting heads, ya know?

  • william anzell
    Posted at 18:00h, 31 October

    I agree with u Kirk,most remakes are not very good,but id like to see some remade,wth.all the technology they have now to make the monsters more real,like dean koontzs watchers,the monster was ridiculous.lol.

  • Kevin Schmidt (Stoly)
    Posted at 23:02h, 31 October

    Mr Von Hammett First off, thanks’ for the opportunity to read your views on horror! It’s Halloween and I’m watching The Shining, again. I’m about the same age as you and I can still remember watching the old Frankenstein, Dracula, Wolfman movies when I was a little guy. Ducking under the coffee table when I was scared. But had to keep watching. Anyway, I have to agree with you in regards to remakes. I’m sure that some special effects would help the oldies but to me that is art and shouldn’t be changed. What I think would be cool is if someone would remake some of the Hitchcock shorts.
    Thanks’ again Kirk- HAPPY HALLOWEEN ?

  • Marc Restivo
    Posted at 17:49h, 02 November


    Off the subject, but would really like to hear your take on “Crimson Peak”. Saw it last Friday night, and while it’s very far from perfect, I can’t simply get the damn imagery out of my head. Jessica Chastain is one helluva horror actress, loved her in “Mama” too.

  • Mike
    Posted at 05:55h, 04 November

    I agree with the others, that The Fly is a worthy remake that maintained a high level of quality.
    I also must say that for all of the evils and annoyances of the internet, I’m ecstatic that my favorite rockstar in the world (due to his down to earth nature and just being a good guy) is able to communicate with the fans directly about his passions and interests OUTSIDE Metallica.

    I know you didn’t have to do this Kirk, but we’re all really happy that you did. Getting a little insight into what makes you tick is a thrill!


  • Christine
    Posted at 17:43h, 04 November

    Remakes of films we’re all too familiar with is like riding a roller coaster for the third or fourth time. It will never be as exciting as the first time and you know what to expect,
    However, take the movie Scarface for example, a remake of a 30s film by the same name. It worked because the bones of the story are the same but overall package is totally different. That said, I think a remake of The Black Cat could be a really interesting and worthwhile project. By the way, if you can’t enough of the Evil Dead series, the first episode of Ash vs. Evil Dead is out on Stars and is directed by Sam Raimi, just fyi.

  • Gabrielle
    Posted at 14:41h, 08 November

    I am 100% with you on remakes, there is almost never a need for it. The Evil Dead was probably the one I was most disappointed by. It is as if the more gore the put in, the less substance it had. Insidious 2 was good because it provided an important back story that will help you in understand the first Insidious. However, the third installment was not as impressive. My questions to you are if you enjoy American Horror Story? Also, what is your opinion on Rob Zombie’s interpretation of Halloween?

  • Brian D'Souza
    Posted at 16:54h, 10 November

    I think some of the remakes, nee reinterpretations, that came out in the mid 2000s were pretty good…Texas Chainsaw + The Beginning, The HIlls Have Eyes, Halloween. There were a couple of turds in the punchbowl though, I’m looking at you Friday the 13th and Amityville Horror.

  • David Dietze
    Posted at 13:36h, 12 November

    First off … I absolutely enjoyed your views in this blog and could not agree anymore. I was just having this same discussion the other day. Why is that no one can create their own killer/slasher. Why is that a new Freddy, Jason, Michael, Leatherface, Pinhead be born…..? I know there has to be writers out there with a script of the new slasher. I am so over the re-imagined versions of classic movies. I am a huge Halloween fan. Part 1 and 2 and are my on the top of my horror movie favorites. Closely followed by Silence of the Lambs! The creativity that went into the creation of Michael. The low budget available to produce it…Even the story about Donald Pleasence (R.I.P Loomis) agreed to take on the role and finish it well under his pay level. John Carpenter was the man! Then fast forward to Rob Zombie’s version. I actually went in with a open mind. It was sacred ground in my heart and soul and I was a fan of Rob’s movies already so that helped. He impressed me with his version of Part 1. It was cool seeing Michael as a kid…building off how screwed up his life was. In the original so much was left open about that and danced around in the later sequels.

    Which in it’s own way ….made it a cool element of not knowing what made him who we was. Rob’s view was well done and made it a plausible reason for the real force of Michael. I still enjoy that one to this day. Then I went in to the Rob Zombie’s sequel with an open mind…..The opening was amazing. But then the whole thing with his mom and the horse and all that bs ruined it for me. Michael is not a momma’s boy HAHAH…. destroyed that movie for me ! Don’t want this to all be about Michael….. So switching gears !

    One remake that i thought was awesome and highly recommend is ” I Spit on Your Grave” remake of Day of the Women.

    The first remake of Nightmare on Elm Street….. WTH … Freedy the child molester killer !!! NO THANKS !!!!!!! I was actually ok with the first two Texas Chainsaw remakes …those were pretty damn awesome ! Let’s fast forward to modern day…. Poltergeist … That was the worst piece of crap I have ever seen. How dare a classic like that be ruined like that. They just need to stop with it all ! Hollywood is just trying to double dip on the revenue the originals made. Think about it….. in this generation not only will the people like you and me that grew up seeing these classics go and see these remakes ….but our kids and teenagers etc etc will be going to see it too !

    As far a sequels go…. It is just obvious throughout time the more sequels that follow the original , the cheesier and damaged the original becomes. Halloween is a prime example…. the original story became so twisted and that the movies were just silly. Then for H20 to come out and act as if none of the other sequels existed…. I mean what the hell ?

    I think i have rambled enough ….I appreciate you having this site and sharing your thoughts. The site looks great and kicks major ass !!!!!

    Side note…. Have you ever seen a movie called “Let Me In” ….. If not…. check it out ! I thought it was amazing and not highly promoted at all ….. Would love to know your thoughts if you watch it. One more movie i thought was pretty cool was called “The Descent.” The first one was really good……part 2 not so much !

    Thank you,
    David Dietze

  • Bob O'Rourke
    Posted at 13:52h, 13 November


    Given that today is Friday the 13th . . . what are your thoughts on the Friday the 13th series? Personally, I’m a big fan of the original up through Part 6. There’s some solid story continuity in 1-4 (with New Jersey license plates even making an appearance through the later sequels) and the events are even somewhat plausible. Part 5 is just an all-around Grindhouse-esque guilty pleasure…who doesn’t love Ethel? haha. And Part 6 is all sorts of self-referential fun! Parts 7 & 8 are okay, with Jason looking the coolest in The New Blood, but the lack of gore kinda kills the fun for me. Jason Goes To Hell, while most fans would throw it out as the WORST, I’d say I’d put it ahead of the cheapo Jason X and the cinematic garbage of Freddy Vs. Jason. The 2009 remake of Friday the 13th was good fun, too, but I’d put that in a separate category!

  • Jessica Sanford
    Posted at 20:14h, 15 November

    Most remakes and franchises (1,2,3 etc.) are not worth seeing. Most but not all. I actually enjoy The recent Halloween movies and actually Insidous chapters are excellent and worth seeing as a movie marathon. Think less gore more suspense.

  • Fritz Striker
    Posted at 11:57h, 16 November

    Modern remakes are generally just cash grabs and have little to nothing to do with creatively adding to what the original started. So as a critical audience member I have yet to see one that warrants the time and money to make it, let alone being considered any ‘good’.

    Of course that is a generalization and there’s exceptions to every rule. For instance you mentioned Carpenter’s THE THING (1982), which is the bar against which all remakes should be judged. Howard Hawks original 1951 film was (and may well still be) Carpenter’s favorite film, so when he set out to make his own version of the original it starts from a place of honor and reverence for him. No modern remake comes from that starting point. Instead almost every modern remake is cooked up in a board room where studio execs champion a remake based on “brand recognition” and “market research” instead of from a place of admiration and passion.

    The best example of this is Zombie’s HALLOWEEN remake (and it’s utterly unwatchable sequel) – the Weinsteins had the rights to a franchise cash cow to which the previous sequel’s abhorrent reviews and ticket sales virtually killed the unkillable Michael Myers. So they decided to take the easy way out and reboot the entire franchise (rather than greenlighting good scripts in the first place) and gave the project to someone with their own brand recognition and therefore would have his own audience to add to ticket sales. Unfortunately Zombie’s audience already were fans of the Halloween franchise and the rockstar’s hero worship of the film’s antagonist completely demystified “The Shape”, removed even the remotest question of motivation for the killer form the viewers mind and making him just another byproduct of a morally bankrupt culture instead of “purely and simply evil”.

    Remakes heightened gore content is just one of many tricks added to these otherwise creatively bereft celluloid shells in an attempt to distract the audience from the otherwise total lack of new ideas or even the most basic elements of quality screenwriting. A fact made all the more clear when these conceptually vacant scripts feel compelled to revisit plot points or fan favorite moments from the original just because they already know the audience responds to those moments.

    Essentially the problem with modern remakes it they are almost universally conceived in boardrooms by non-creatives for the sole purpose of making money. So how anyone can view them as anything but high-fidelity plagiarism in completely beyond my ability to comprehend.

  • Samuel Oldham
    Posted at 15:09h, 16 November

    I am serious about my horror films, having been traumatized at a very early age when my parents and our babysitters took us to scary movies to shut us up. I could get carried away so I will limit myself. My top three reboots are John Carpenter’s The Thing, Gore Verbinski’s The Ring and Marcus Nispel’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre. If Gus Van Sant had done two small things in his Psycho remake, which is my favorite horror movie of all time, it might have been included because a reboot of such a well crafted classic is impossible. I like the idea of a homage but to scare today’s audience the approach to the shower scene had to be altered, AND NOT WITH SUBLIMINAL CUTS! All he had to do was realize how valuable this scene’s shock value was. Everyone already knows what’s coming so first you get rid of the shot where Mrs. Bates is approaching the curtain and shock everyone with the sudden reveal. Then, after she leaves just go back to the book and when the camera pulls back from the close up of her eye, reveal that her HEAD WAS CUT OFF. Simple, faithful and effective. I was raised Catholic and I notice that film directors exposed to Catholicism make the best thrillers, like Hitchcock, De Palma and Scorsese. Maybe it has to do with the symbolic drinking of blood or something. This is a very cool forum and I look forward to checking it out more in the future.

  • Alex Young
    Posted at 19:26h, 16 November

    Did no one mention Night of the Living Dead ’90? It is arguably better than the original. While it is mostly a straightforward remake, Tom Savini taking your knowledge of the original and using it to misdirect you is a nice update.

  • Nina Doumain
    Posted at 13:15h, 25 November

    The question could probably be answered in two different and opposing ways reflecting two different aspects.
    The first aspect, faces the play as a classic and timeless human creation, whose components and building blocks function as symbols. Therefore, the spectator is able, at any time to reduce the meaning of the play to the modern social frame.
    In the modern social reality for example, in Aristofane’s ” O Plutos”, brings equal calamities to humanity with those of the modern capital. Nevertheless, the following questions could make up a possible objection. Doesn’t the accessibility to multiple readings, as well as the possibility of reduction, require a suitably educated and refined spectator?
    Do both the classicism and the timeless of the play include the immediacy of the received meaning by the spectator?
    The second aspect faces the play as a story or a scenario, which can be retold with new ingredients and building elements. The indispensable condition is the whole transaction of the above mentioned elements to their modern dimensions. Consequently, the spectator will be able to perceive the play to its modern social frame.For instance, In Charlie Chaplin’s “Modern Times” by replacing the screwing machine with a computer, in the scene where the actor is constantly screwing, the modern alienation of the worker will be shown, more clearly and in reality.
    However, does the simple use of modern technological devices as well as the non-elaborate reduction of the old ingredients and building elements of the play
    drive to the misinterpretation or worse the loss of the meaning and of the aesthetic dimensions which characterized it in the first place?

  • Tracy Paseman
    Posted at 13:04h, 30 January

    I’ve seen re-makes that were better than the original, and others that just couldn’t hold a candle to them..

    And the older I get, the pickier I am !

    I guess I’m a purist at heart !

    • Tracy Paseman
      Posted at 14:17h, 10 February

      I’ll make 2 rare exceptions about re-makes :

      1. I heard the re-make of The Thing was quite good…it’s on my viewing list.

      2. The re-make of The Fly with Jeff Goldblum and Geena Davis was quite good !

  • Andrew
    Posted at 11:24h, 31 January

    I agree…the majority of horror remakes just can’t hold a candle to the originals.

  • Andrew
    Posted at 11:24h, 31 January

    I agree…the majority of horror remakes just can’t hold a candle to the originals.

  • yill myers
    Posted at 14:40h, 01 February

    hey kirk,
    I do not like most of the remakes either, they do it just for the money!
    and it’s annoying because I like to think it’s not about money… just like with metal, it comes from the heart.
    at least for me it means a lot.
    I kinda did like the halloween remake tho, but it should have been a different mask and a different name… it should’ve been a different movie all together… the fact that it was a halloween remake bothered me.
    because halloween is just so iconic and just brilliant! insidious 3 is kinda worth checking out, I enjoyed it! but the first is the best in my opinion. haven’t seen the rest of them… and halloween 3 get’s so much hate… I loes it… no michael but still an awesome movie on it’s own!
    I love your blog kirk! I realy love reading it haha it makes me feel less alone and that it’s okay to be a horror nerd… get a lot of bullshit for that.. highschool,, I finaly build up the guts to reply to your blog haha I hope you read it… much love.. yill

Post A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.