Remake mistake

ONE of the most pointless films in the past decade was director Gus Van Sant's scene-by-scene remake of the classic Alfred Hitchcock shocker Psycho. No purpose was served by making a copycat version of an already perfect horror movie.

Quite rightly, the new Psycho was derided by critics and ignored by audiences. This hasn't deterred Hollywood pursuing the craze for remaking horror movies, including plans to put a 21st century spin on another Hitchcock classic, The Birds.

Not so coincidentally, scenes from that film are seen playing on a TV set in a motel room in The Hitcher - not the 1986 chiller that's achieved cult status, but a remix with British actor Sean Bean taking over from Rutger Hauer as the sadistic hitch-hiker.

Both The Hitcher and the planned remake of The Birds come from Platinum Dunes, formed five years ago with Pearl Harbour and Armageddon director Michael Bay among its bosses. So far they've produced The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Amityville Horror and the prequel The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. Other titles getting a revamp include, amazingly, Friday The 13th, which has already spawned more sequels than Dracula's had blood transfusions.

Surely it would be cheaper and better just to re-release the originals. But no, Hollywood - and not just Platinum Dunes - can't leave well alone. Besides, it can be done without spending too much money. Horror movies have always been attractive to producers because they can be made relatively cheaply - a good supply of fake blood being the biggest expense - and without big expensive stars.

The trouble is, these remakes are needless and, more often than not, artistically inferior. Adding a more generous splattering of blood and a few inches more of naked flesh doesn't add up to a fresh look at an old movie. Because they can do it cheaply, usually with a vaguely familiar young TV star in a starring role, they can make a profit. The film doesn't need to be a box-office blockbuster to pay its way.

The makers do their best to justify tampering with familiar movies. Dave Myers, who directed the latest Hitcher, says when he studied the original, he thought he could improve on certain things. So the female lead takes a more active role in the new version and this time it is her boyfriend rather than her who meets a particularly grisly end.

"I thought I could make things different, particularly with the girlfriend-boyfriend aspect," says Myers. "That changes the film altogether. So, in a sense, it's inspired from the original and it still has a chance to be fresh".

Bean's reservations were dispelled by reading the script. "The original's got a cult following, but a lot of thought and attention to detail has been put into this. It's not a copy. And some remakes can work," he says.

Maybe. Zachary Knighton, who plays the boyfriend, unwittingly nails what's wrong with the remake by noting that the original had "an eerie, quiet mood" whereas the 2007 version is "more of a thrill-packed version of the same story". But the menacing mood is what made the original work. The new way is different but no better.

The announcement that the Hammer Films brand is being resurrected can only mean more horror remakes are on the way. Some of the British company's biggest hits were retakes of old horror movies, like Frankenstein and Dracula. The 295-strong library of Hammer titles gives the new backers plenty of material to regurgitate.

The films of William Castle, one of Hollywood's most successful horror film-makers, have already been given makeovers for modern audiences, with varying success.

The classier the cast, the greater the chance of success. Putting Oscar-winner Geoffrey Rush in The House On Haunted Hill was a good move, unlike the stunt casting of famous-for-being-famous Paris Hilton in House Of Wax.

Castle was a showman and the remakes sadly lack the gimmicks he used to promote his movies. Such as the skeleton that suddenly came whizzing over the heads of unsuspecting cinema audiences or seats fitted with devices to give viewers a mild electric shock at appropriate moments during the screening.

Few things could be more horrific than director Neil La Bute's fresh take on the cult British horror movie The Wicker Man last year. The remake was so dire that distributors felt obliged to keep it out of sight of critics before it had opened in cinemas. The Omen and Dawn Of The Dead fared better if not spectacularly with audiences.

Several of today's most successful directors started out making cheap horror movies. Sam Raimi made his name with Evil Dead long before he helmed a hat-trick of record-breaking Spider-Man movies.

Some never quite managed to escape the horror genre and are more welcoming of remakes than critics. John Carpenter remade the old 1950s horror, The Thing, to good effect, only to see his film, The Fog, turned into a wet weekend of a movie with Smallville's Tom Welling.

His own career has been quiet of late so he welcomes reviving his past successes, especially if it puts money in his bank.

"If everybody else is making remakes and they want to pay me money to make a remake of an old movie of mine, why not? It's a good idea," he says.

Quite what he'll think of the remake of his most famous horror film Halloween, directed by the appropriately named Rod Zombie, remains to be seen. Zombie's previous movies include House Of A Thousand Corpses and The Devil's Rejects, as grisly a pair of shockers as you'll see at your local multiplex.

After nine sequels, the Halloween drops the numerals and tells about serial killer Michael Myers' early years. The role, usually taken by a large but unknown performer, has gone to Tyler Mane, the impressive 6ft 8in man who was Sabretooth in X-Men. Malcolm McDowell steps into the shoes of Donald Pleasence as Dr Loomis with 18-year-old newcomer Scout Taylor-Compton taking over as scream queen from Jamie Lee Curtis, whom the first Halloween made into a star.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre director, Tobe Hopper, embraced the remake of his cult horror. "It's different from the original, but it's scary and it's fun," he says. "It's a wonderful stage for classics to continue in the mind of the population way in the future."

He has a point. While movie buffs, critics and commentators get hot under the collar at film-makers daring to tamper with old horror movies, the average twenty-something multiplex cinemagoer couldn't care less.

Fans of blood and guts horror movies are more interested in the corpse count and the killing methods than in whether it achieves the tension of the original. They don't care if it's Jamie Lee Curtis or Paris Hilton getting turned into a human kebab by a serial killer. As long as it makes them jump and go "yuk" in the bloody end, the film has achieved its purpose - remake or not.

The Hitcher (15) opens in cinemas on Friday.