No, it's interesting to remake a film for the contemporary audience today. I think it's a good idea; it needs to respect the original idea. Don't just take the title and change everything else.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think the executives at the studios today realize that it's easier and safer to go the - to some known territory which is a remake of a successful film. It's less chancy than taking a fresh idea.
Always changing genres, making very different films is a good idea. It's a way of making yourself feel vulnerable again, getting back to that innocence. As is working within a circumspect budget.
Movies always are open to being remade because times change so much, and the tempo of movies changes. I think of it like a James Bond. They can have different actors play the same role... I've had people come up to me and say, 'We want to remake 'The Jerk' with so and so.' And I say, 'Fine.' It just doesn't bother me. It's an honor actually.
I have no problems with remakes, and I think it's interesting. I mean, coming from the theater, we've been remaking 'Hamlet' for a hundred years, so it's no problem to me at all. A good story can be told in many different ways in different places; I just think it's interesting.
If a remake is not good, no one wants to see it and, again, it doesn't hurt the original.
If you are going to remake a film, you may as well remake a classic.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I think it's really important to remake things. If you never remake the classics, no one would know Shakespeare.
I think the movie business is in trouble. It's all movies that you've seen before. Everything's a remake; they want things that are familiar rather than things that surprise you.
I don't think it's sacrilegious to remake any movie, including a good or even great movie.
I would never try and do a remake off a movie. I think that's a whole different thing. I think everyone will always remember the first movie, and they will always compare it with the second one.