# X: The Man With The X-Ray Eyes/remake



## Johnny Thunder (Feb 24, 2006)

Don't shoot the messenger......

Johnny T here with news of an "updating" of a classic flick that I dig.......

Spanish director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo (28 Weeks Later) has been hired by MGM to "develop" a film based on Roger Corman's 1963 film................

Read on for the details....

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/15552


----------



## Bone Dancer (Oct 7, 2005)

I remember seeing this years ago. It wouldnt be my first choice for a remake. Some old films are classics and should be left alone, other old films died an should be left that way.
I see they are remaking the Wolfman, and from the clips I have seen they are making an attempt to stay true to the origional film. Thats the kind of remake I like. The special effects of the old classic films were cutting edge for thier day. Today it can be done faster and more seamless, which is fine. But dont go behond what was done unless it inhances the story and does not distract from it.


----------



## DeadDudeintheHouse (Jul 23, 2008)

Bone Dancer said:


> Some old films are classics and should be left alone


You know something? That's exactly how I feel about horror films remaking stuff from 1968 to the 1990's. But I feel exactly the opposite about older films. Anything from the silent era to Polanski's black and white films, I feel is more than fair to remake now. In fact, I would practically _encourage_ filmmakers today to remake those films. I feel this way for a few reasons.

Most blatant is the time difference. Socially and culturally, horror became more visceral and progressive in the later era I've indicated. They tackled subjects overtly in ways that were before considered taboo, they reinvented the style of horror and the use of atmosphere and music and other integral elements, and they feel as a group radically different from the earlier films. By and large. Then, the basic approach of the earlier films and the format they were made in. You saw more, in fact- almost all horror films of the early era were all literary adaptations. Made in socially repressive eras where fears had to be hinted upon and very seldomly addressed overtly. That makes the later films more attractive for film producers now to remake, because they see the original plotlines for the 70's and 80's films are stictly confrontational. And for the remake, they basically pose the films as brutal experiences while the film directors aim more for psychological terror. It's a _completely_ off dynamic and doesn't produce great films.

However, with remakes of the older films or remakes of the new and current wave of Japanese horror, I find them doomed to get stuck in the trap of sameness all the films marketed as _the new_ The Ring or The Sixth Sense always get stuck in. Or, God help us- Van Helsing, or something like Underworld.


----------



## Bone Dancer (Oct 7, 2005)

Perhaps "left alone" was not the best way to put that. I guess my concern is that the older films will be lost and younger generations of movie goers will not know ( for good or bad ) were the new films they watch came from.


----------

