Thinking about the movie 3:10 to Yuma, many people will compare the new movie (Crowe & Bale) to the original 1957 version staring Glenn Ford and Van Heflin.
I'm not sure what I think about remakes.
Recently I watched a famous french film-noir classic called Rififi, and have heard there is plans to remake this 1950s film with Al Pacino in the lead role.
Rififi is an amazing film about 4 crooks and a perfectly planned jewelry heist. This film even predates the original Oceans 11, not to mention all the other jewelry heist movies that have followed.
There are so many things that made this film unique and original. The two unique things that really stood out were the lounge singing with the silhouette man in the background and the thirty virtually silent minutes of the film while the men were executing their heist.
Yet would a remake have these same scenes, filmed in the same way? Is the purpose of a remake simply to reintroduce a good story to a new audience?
I would think that a remake should be viewed as an improvement on the original, not a copy of something that's already well respected. But who knows maybe that's just the way I feel about it. But the idea of remaking something good seems like an uphill battle not worth fighting.