Remakes of classic British cinema?

[Brief Encounter]

When looking at the BFI's Terence Rattigan season, I was surprised to see they were showing a 1999 remake of The Winslow Boy, which I had no idea existed! I didn't think the 1948 original was particularly well-known, so it seems an odd choice to remake.

Of course, The Ladykillers (1955) was remade in 2004... but have there been many remakes of films from 'the golden age' (ie. pre-1960) in more recent years?

The Wicked Lady (1945) is another, given an awful remake by Michael Winner in 1983.

Brief Encounter (1945) was remade as a TV movie in 1974. I'll avoid that. I'll also be avoiding The Lady Vanishes - the 1938 classic was done again in 1979.

Some were made twice during the era...

When Chili Bouchier saw the silent Carnival in 1921, she said "I'm going to be in that film." "How? It's already been made!", her friend asked. Ten years later she was in the sound remake. There were other remakes of silent films once sound came in, I think.

Alfred Hitchcock remade his own 1934 film (how often has THAT been done?) The Man Who Knew Too Much in 1956.

More please! Any you'd like to see remade? I'd love to see a George Formby film remade, but I know it's as likely as pigs flying!

[GRAEME]

I'd love to see a George Formby film remade, but I know it's as likely as pigs flying!

Why?

Surely George's films were vehicles for his comic shtick - not really of any value in themselves?

Didn't Norman Wisdom more or less do one or two, anyway?

[Brief Encounter]

I like the songs, and the character he plays - some did have good plots. A three-minute clip of Norman was enough for me.

[will.15]

Two versions of The Browning Version.


Pygmalion became My Fair Lady

I Am a Camera became Cabaret

[DB7]

More please!

School for Scoundrels, Last Holiday, Easy Virtue, Brighton Rock..

[will.15]

Two Four Feathers

[DaveK]

Two Four Feathers

And one 'Storm Over the Nile' - which used footage from the first 'Four Feathers' stretched to fill the Cinemascope frame

[Brief Encounter]

Didn't know about the 1994 Browning Version... it seems to have slipped off the radar somewhat these days.

Last Holiday is an odd one... so is School for Scoundrels. A lot of them, like Easy Virtue, are just new filmed versions of the book or play - I'd be surprised if they'd watched the silent original!

Another: the St. Trinian's films.

[DB7]

Oscar Wilde is a popular source for remakes and another Graham Greene second outing was End of the Affair.

[will.15]

The 1934 Lost Patrol was a remake of a British silent.

[MonicaMC]

Brief Encounter (1945) was remade as a TV movie in 1974. I'll avoid that. I'll also be avoiding The Lady Vanishes - the 1938 classic was done again in 1979.

I don't think you can do justice to remaking the film as it was any more today than even in '74, but a dream of mine would be to have someone like Baz Luhrman give it a go, based on the Kneehigh Theatre production that made it to Broadway. I would SOOOOOO love to be Laura, with someone like Cary Elwes as Fred. Not sure about Alec though.

And before you say it, if Vivien Leigh could win two Oscars for playing Southern belles, why NOT an American portraying a middle class Englishwoman in the 1930s? :)

[DaveK]

I don't think you can do justice to remaking the film as it was any more today than even in '74, but a dream of mine would be to have someone like Baz Luhrman give it a go, based on the Kneehigh Theatre production that made it to Broadway. I would SOOOOOO love to be Laura, with someone like Cary Elwes as Fred. Not sure about Alec though.:)

The Kneehigh production of 'Brief Encounter' was a marvelous re-creation of the film for the stage. At the Gielgud Theatre they have recently opened a production of Jacques Demy's film 'The Umbrellas of Cherbourg'. Am looking forward to seeing that as well.

[GRAEME]

Usual misunderstandings here about remakes and later adaptations of literary originals.

Second or third (or so on) versions of plays/novels are not (usually) remakes of of the first film - they are just newer adaptations of the original text.

A remake is a new film based on an older film.

[will.15]

Usual misunderstandings here about remakes and later adaptations of literary originals.

Second or third (or so on) versions of plays/novels are not (usually) remakes of of the first film - they are just newer adaptations of the original text.

A remake is a new film based on an older film.

William Wyler directed two versions of The Children's Hour. Are you really claiming the second version he directed wasn't a remake?

According to your definition there are very few remakes because most movies are based on material adapted from another medium.

[GRAEME]

William Wyler directed two versions of The Children's Hour. Are you really claiming the second version he directed wasn't a remake?

According to your definition there are very few remakes because most movies are based on material adapted from another medium.

I have seen both of those, and yes I am claiming that the second is most definitely not based on the first! It is much closer to the play. Perhaps Wyler made a second version precisely because he could do the material better justice with the relaxation of censorship.

There are many remakes - and some are based on original material but the film version is the obvious main source. Both remakes of Get Carter are clearly more heavily influenced by Hodges' film than by the book it was based on. The Kenneth More 39 Steps is specifically a remake of the Hitchcock and not the novel.

To test my theory, consider this: would you really call Mel Gibson's Hamlet a remake of Olivier's? And if not, why not?

[will.15]

Ancient plays or novels that have a zillion adaptations I wouldn't consider a remake ( and Olivier wasn't the first movie Hamlet, the Danes did it in the silent era). The major studios in the golden era would constantly make new versions of their movies because they owned the rights to the existing material. Three versions of The Maltese Falcon, the second heavily altered, but still in my opinions remakes. Even when the source material is a classic and made at a different studio it could be argued another version qualifies as a remake. David Lean used in a key supporting role the same actor who played the part in the 1930s Universal version. Obviously Lean saw it and was influenced by it to the extent he cast the same actor.

[GRAEME]

Ancient plays or novels that have a zillion adaptations I wouldn't consider a remake ( and Olivier wasn't the first movie Hamlet, the Danes did it in the silent era). The major studios in the golden era would constantly make new versions of their movies because they owned the rights to the existing material. Three versions of The Maltese Falcon, the second heavily altered, but still in my opinions remakes. Even when the source material is a classic and made at a different studio it could be argued another version qualifies as a remake. David Lean used in a key supporting role the same actor who played the part in the 1930s Universal version. Obviously Lean saw it and was influenced by it to the extent he cast the same actor.

David Lean? What are you talking about?

The Maltese Falcon is a perfect example: The third adaptation (with Bogart) is a near definitive version of the novel - not a remake of the first film. The second one may well be a remake, I haven't seen it.

There's nothing to get our knickers in a twist about. Some later versions are remakes, others aren't. I'm just objecting to the sloppy general use of the term "remake".

Casino Royale (2006) is an adaptation of the novel, not a remake of Casino Royale (1967).

I wonder why we get so sniffy about the mere concept of remakes? Nobody bemoans new productions of clssic plays, or suggests that after the first run they should never to produced again in an original way.

[CaptainWaggett]

Ancient plays or novels that have a zillion adaptations I wouldn't consider a remake ( and Olivier wasn't the first movie Hamlet, the Danes did it in the silent era). The major studios in the golden era would constantly make new versions of their movies because they owned the rights to the existing material. Three versions of The Maltese Falcon, the second heavily altered, but still in my opinions remakes. Even when the source material is a classic and made at a different studio it could be argued another version qualifies as a remake. David Lean used in a key supporting role the same actor who played the part in the 1930s Universal version. Obviously Lean saw it and was influenced by it to the extent he cast the same actor.

Or he may have been influenced by the fact that Francis L Sullivan had worked on Great Expectations and was just about the most obvious casting for that sort of role when Raymond Lovell was busy

[cassidy]

There have been more than a few Hounds lurking around Baskerville Hall !

[will.15]

Have you really seen the first version of The Maltese Falcon? If anything it is closer to the novel. No, it is not as good, but it has scenes not in the Huston version, like when Spade makes Bridget undress to make sure she didn't steal his money that the Fatman actually palmed. Spade is not one of Cortez's better performances, maybe he was still adjusting to talking, he was in silents, but he bears a closer resemblance to the novel's description of Spade than Bogart. Huston went back to the book for his screenplay, but the first version sticks close to the book as well, it is just not as well done. The second version is far afield with name changes and a Fat Lady and a ram's horn instead of a falcon.But just because they screwed around doesn't disqualify it as a remake. One of the reasons WB made it twice more was they only had to pay Hammett once. He received nothing for the next two.

We get sniffy about movie remakes because most of them suck. The advantage a new stage production of a famous play had is none of us were around o see the original production if it was many decades ago to make a comparison.

The first Casino Royale was more of a parody than a serious attempt to do the novel. But most movie remakes exist because of the popularity of a previous film.