YTread Logo
YTread Logo

The Worst Movie Remakes Of All Time

The Worst Movie Remakes Of All Time
Remaking a classic

movie

is never easy. You've got to appeal to fans of the original while impressing a whole new crop of critics and drawing in new fans at the same

time

. It's a tough balancing act... and it's easy to screw up. In the 1971 British crime film Get Carter, London gangster Jack Carter returns to his hometown after the death of his brother. When he suspects foul play, he decides to dig deeper and find out who was really responsible. As he delves back into the city's
the worst movie remakes of all time
world of organized crime, tensions escalate and violent conflict ensues. The 2000 remake of Get Carter, starring Sylvester Stallone, wasn't exactly a bright spot in the actor's career. This

time

, the story was set in America, with Carter a mob enforcer living in Las Vegas who returns home to Seattle after his brother's death. But it wasn't the change in setting that disappointed critics it was the fact that the plot was formulaic and contrived in comparison to the original,
despite the fact that it was supposed to be a suspenseful mystery. Entertainment Weekly's Owen Gleiberman wrote: "Carter, who goes to Seattle to hunt down his brother's killer, may have entered a labyrinth of evil, but his response to it is as hollow as it is monolithic." 1990's Total Recall follows Douglas Quaid, a construction worker who begins having disturbing dreams about life on Mars. He ends up getting a memory chip implanted that gives him a virtual reality
experience of working as a secret agent on the planet. But as the film goes on, the line between fact and fiction becomes blurred, and Quaid struggles to figure out who he really is and what he has really done on Mars. "If I'm not me, who the hell am I?" Here's where the 2012 remake went completely wrong: it isn't even set on Mars. Instead, it takes place on a future, dystopian Earth. And sure, that concept could have worked well anyway, but this version of Total Recall
fell flat in pretty much every other aspect, too. "If I'm not me, then who the hell am I?" According to some critics, the action sequences were the only real bright spot of the film. CineVue's Joseph Walsh wrote: "Whilst the action is grand in scope and certainly high in production values it somehow lacks any tangible sense of tension or drama." In John Carpenter's 1980 cult classic The Fog, a mysterious fog covers a California town, bringing with it the ghosts of
dead sailors who promptly set about terrorizing the residents. The concept could have been corny, but the film's slow build to its scarier moments kept audiences hooked. It seemed like a film that could have benefited from a remake with updated special effects too. Sadly, the 2005 remake managed to botch it completely. Although Carpenter produced the remake himself, it just didn't strike a chord with critics. The scares weren't scary, and the ghosts didn't come across as
threatening or intimidating in any way. And if a horror film isn't genuinely scary, it usually ends up feeling boring and muddled which is exactly what happened here. Writing for ScreenCrush, critic Matt Singer suggested it could be one of the

worst

movie

s ever made. He wrote: "This

movie

's not even that foggy! The clouds in two-thirds of this

movie

are so sparse they wouldn't even warrant a push notification from your phone's weather app." The Stepfather is a 1987
slasher about a murderer who kills his family, changes his identity, and then marries into another family so he can repeat the process. His new stepdaughter soon becomes suspicious of him, and sets out to prove his identity and save her family. The film falls somewhere between horror, crime thriller, and black comedy, and the plot is just interesting enough to carry audiences along to a genuinely satisfying conclusion. But the 2009 remake of The Stepfather failed to do the same. The
original's palpable tension just isn't there, the plot holes are distracting, and the climax of the film ties up everything a little too neatly with a predictable series of events leading up the final moments. For the AV Club, Scott Tobias wrote: "Even by horror-remake standards, The Stepfather sets the bar for pointlessness." Originally released in 1956, Around the World in 80 Days is an epic adventure based on the novel of the same name by Jules Verne one that ended up
winning five Academy Awards, including the award for Best Picture. The plot is pretty simple: Phileas Fogg makes a bet that he can get around the world in a mere eighty days, and subsequently sets off on a race across the globe. A tale like this might seem

time

less, but the 2004 remake didn't take audiences on quite the same ride as the original. Instead, it barely followed the plot of Verne's novel, and ended up being nominated for

Worst

Remake at the Razzies. It also went on to win
Most Unwelcome Remake at The Stinkers Bad

Movie

Awards. Marty Mapes summed it up for

Movie

Habit, when he wrote: "Around the World in 80 Days is the kind of

movie

you should see if you're looking for an excuse to sit in an air-conditioned theater for two hours, and you've already seen all the good

movie

s." Nicolas Cage has a strong track record of starring in films that prove a little underwhelming for critics, and Bangkok Dangerous definitely falls into that category. The
the worst movie remakes of all time
original Bangkok Dangerous is a Thai crime thriller about Kong, a gunman who can neither hear nor speak. He works as an assassin for hire, struggles to find real meaning in life, and eventually meets a tragic end. It's an intense film, packed full of action and emotion. Cage's version, however, couldn't hold a candle to the original despite the fact that it was made by the same directors. In the 2008 remake of Bangkok Dangerous, several key details are changed. Cage plays the
protagonist, Joe, who isn't deaf or mute. The cinematography is visually confusing at

time

s, and the idea of a hitman who eventually gains a conscience feels kinda cliche. As Scott Nash remarked in a review for Three

Movie

Buffs: "The burnt out assassin shtick is old and tired." The 1959 historical drama Ben-Hur is an undisputed classic. Interestingly enough, this version of Ben-Hur was actually a remake itself, and one which definitely improved on the original 1925 silent film,
Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ. For one thing, it features Hollywood's most iconic chariot race. It was difficult to see how a remake could have outdone the 1959 version but that didn't stop Paramount from trying. What could have been a stunning historical epic turned out to be a box office bomb. The aesthetics were downgraded by haphazard editing and lackluster CGI, and aside from a few exciting action scenes, little about the film stood out. Alison Rowat wrote in The Herald: "A
thrill ride in parts, as long as you can forgive the hokiness, wooden dialogue, and long-slog running

time

." 1956's Invasion of the Body Snatchers might not seem as slick or pretty as today's horror films, but it's still widely regarded as a classic. In this sci-fi horror

movie

, alien spores grow into seed pods that can produce physical replacements of human beings without any shred of human emotions. A critically and commercially successful remake followed in 1978, and another
retelling, titled Body Snatchers, was released in 1993. In 2007, another version of the story was released, this

time

titled The Invasion. Rather than creating a straight remake, the writers tried to take it in a different direction and make the story more contemporary and political. The result? A film that was widely criticized for an inconsistent narrative, one whose deeper themes were subsequently lost in the mess. For Slate, Dana Stevens wrote: "It falls far short as an effective
sci-fi thriller, not to mention the brainy political allegory it's determined to be." 1953's House of Wax was a 3-D horror hit in which a sculptor stocks his museum by killing people and coating their corpses with wax. It was actually a remake of an earlier film, the 1933 Mystery of the Wax Museum. Audiences were mostly enthusiastic about this version, and it did fairly well at the box office. All in all, not a bad go. In 2005, a modern-day House of Wax was released, but the plot
was quite different, preferring to err more on the "shrill teen slasher" side of things. Now, there's nothing wrong with a cheesy slasher but compared to the impact of the 1953 version, this retelling was shallow and way too reliant on cheap scares. Granted, this was probably obvious based on the casting alone: with Paris Hilton in a supporting role, it was never going to be taking home an Oscar. As Maitland McDonagh wrote for TV Guide: "It delivers some bracingly nasty gore
scenes, but there's no spark left in the run-scream-repeat formula." In the 1991 film Point Break, Keanu Reeves plays an undercover FBI agent who has to investigate and infiltrate a group of bank robbers who also happen to be surfers. But while the premise of Point Break may have seemed clunky, everything still managed to come together to make a downright ridiculous yet genuinely entertaining

movie

. So how do you recapture the magic of a film with an unexpected cult following? Well, if
the

movie

's 2015 remake is any indication… you can't. The 2015 Point Break features some visually stunning action scenes, but other than that, it totally falls flat. In a review for

Time

s of India, Reagan Gavin Rasquinha summed up the film's fatal flaw: "Point Break comes across as a string of admittedly amazing action sequences and sports feats with the rest of the film haphazardly built up around it." The 1985 zombie film Day of the Dead follows a group of scientists
and soldiers who live in a bunker in the aftermath of a zombie invasion. Several zombies are kept captive for the purpose of research; an arrangement that obviously goes very wrong indeed. Before long, a conflict breaks out that threatens the very survival of the human race. Now, Day of the Dead is obviously a pretty bloody film, but as with all of George Romero's zombie

movie

s, it balances its violence with a genuinely thoughtful critique of society. However, the 2008 remake forsakes any
the worst movie remakes of all time
attempt to bring a real message to the audience in favor of gore and guts. There's no real commentary on the state of humanity, the special effects look cheap, and the zombies are so intelligent and agile that they operate less like zombies and more like evil human beings with superpowers. Writing for the Pittsburgh City Paper, Jordan Snowden said: "Like infected zombie areas put under quarantine, I would lock this film away in a box and leave it there for good." Adam Sandler's
2002 remake of Frank Capra's 1936 film Mr. Deeds Goes to Town doesn't exactly rank amongst his best work. In the original, Longfellow Deeds gets by making a living by juggling odd jobs during the Great Depression, until he suddenly inherits $20 million from his late uncle. He soon falls in love with Louise "Babe" Bennett, and an unexpected love story unfolds. The plot of 2002's Mr. Deeds is similar, but the jokes are grating, the characters are bland and irritating, and the
entire narrative is dumbed down to the point where it's practically insulting to the audience and to Capra's memory. In a review for the Seattle

Time

s, Moira Macdonald wrote: "Mr. Deeds is supposed to be a celebration of the goodness of regular people... but really it's nothing more than a money maker for the filmmakers and a pointless star vehicle for Sandler." 1972's The Heartbreak Kid is a different kind of romantic comedy. Self-absorbed Lenny is married to clingy
Lila, and on their honeymoon, he ditches her to pursue a manipulative college girl named Kelly. He impulsively divorces Lila and proposes to Kelly, but it becomes clear that her sole reason for marrying him is to rebel against her father. At their wedding, Lenny ends up ignored by almost everyone, including the bride, and this dark comedy ends on a fairly depressing note. The 2007 remake of The Heartbreak Kid, starring Ben Stiller, didn't do quite so much to push the boundaries of the genre.
The characters are nasty to the point of being practically irredeemable, and the whole thing totally fails to differentiate itself from any other film in the genre. In fact, Rolling Stone dubbed it the

worst

remake of the year. In a review for eFilmCritic, Peter Sobczynski said: " an ugly, hateful and deeply unfunny bit of hackwork." Remaking a truly classic horror film is no easy task, and the 1998 remake of Psycho made that crystal clear. It certainly didn't help that the
original 1960 Psycho was downright chilling and near-perfect — so fans weren't exactly begging for a do-over, either. "We all go a little mad some

time

s." The remake didn't take much artistic license, opting instead for a shot-for-shot copy of the original. Honestly, it's hard not to ask why it was worth making the film in the first place if the filmmakers would refuse to deviate from the source material. Everything from the dialogue to the score is almost a carbon copy of
the original. Somehow, though, they still got it wrong. The film was nominated for a grand total of three Golden Raspberry Awards, and won for

Worst

Remake and

Worst

Director. Nitrate Online Review's Sean Axmaker wrote: "Even with Hitchcock's shot list... Van Sant can't come up with anything more than a wan tribute to the master, proving it takes more than a good storyboard to make a film work." In 2006, the Japanese horror film Kairo was remade for American audiences as
Pulse. In Kairo, evil spirits manage to find their way into our world through the internet, causing a series of strange and horrifying events to occur. The film features two parallel narratives that show characters dealing with the consequences of this paranormal invasion. In the remake, the unique dual narrative approach was scrapped. The premise was similar enough, but everything that made the original a cult favorite in Japan was missing. The film relies on grotesque imagery to get its points
across, but those cheap thrills aren't enough for a film that fails to delve deeper into any meaningful themes. Writing for the Austin Chronicle, critic Mark Savlov said: " curiously dull Americanization of one of the finest examples of subtle, moody J-horror out there." The 1980 film Fame follows a group of high school students after they gain acceptance to the prestigious High School of Performing Arts in New York City. As they study their respective crafts, they face difficult
obstacles in the classroom, on stage, and in their personal lives. There are moments that slip into melodrama, but overall, the characters are relatable and sympathetic, and the musical numbers were a hit. But the 2009 remake of Fame just doesn't strike that same atmosphere. It's too slick and polished, like it was intended to be an after-school special rather than a film about authentic, complex, and ambitious characters. It lacks the original's gritty edge too, seeming to take cues
from High School Musical and Glee instead. Critic Roger Ebert gave the film two stars, writing: "The new Fame is a sad reflection of the new Hollywood, where material is sanitized and dumbed down for a hypothetical teen market that is way too sophisticated for it." 1973 British horror film The Wicker Man follows devout Christian police sergeant Neil Howie as he investigates an isolated island cult. He travels to the island of Summerisle to find a missing young girl, Rowan Morrison, who
he believes has been taken to the island based on the contents of an anonymous letter. Howie worries that she's intended to be a human sacrifice for the cult, but what they have planned for Howie is even more terrifying. The Nicolas Cage-led 2006 remake of The Wicker Man couldn't help but fall short of the eerie expectations set by the original. Moments intended to be harrowing are instead so absurd that they came across as genuinely hilarious, and the unsettling atmosphere of the
original film is completely missing. “Not the bees Not the bees ah. my eyes, my eyes!” When a horror

movie

comes off more like an ill-conceived comedy, it's hard to walk away without feeling like everyone involved was phoning it in. The 2008 American remake of the Japanese film One Missed Call has the distinction of being one of the few films to score a whopping zero percent on the Tomatometer. The original One Missed Call wasn't exactly a classic, but this just meant there was a
real opportunity for the remake to outshine the original. And it still completely missed the mark. One Missed Call just wasn't scary enough for critics, but that lack of fear factor isn't the

movie

's real problem. No, the real problem is that it's just so unforgivably boring. As Common Sense Media wrote in their review: "One Missed Call suffers from predictable characters, overused conventions of the horror genre, and a plot that never really makes sense." The 1939
comedy film The Women featured an all-female cast, and while one of the main themes of the film is the characters' relationships with men, not a single man is seen throughout. With today's push for more female representation in

movie

s, you would think that remaking The Women would present a great opportunity for Hollywood. Sadly, the 2008 remake left much to be desired. It wasn't anywhere near as witty or charming as the original, and the ensemble cast's talent was largely
wasted. Comparing the film to the 1939 version, critic Linda Barnard wrote for The Star: "What was then snappy dialogue from meowing madams now flaccidly flaps, lost in translation from old world to new." Check out one of our newest videos right here! Plus, even more Looper videos about your favorite

movie

s are coming soon. Subscribe to our YouTube channel and hit the bell so you don't miss a single one.