Roger Ebert once said that the only reason to ever remake a movie is if it is a film that relies heavily on technology, and in the years since the original, the technology has improved significantly enough to also improve the movie. Based on that, it seemed like a no-brainer to remake both the 1976 and 2005 versions of King Kong. Sure, neither the ’76 man in a monkey suit or the ’05 CGI was half as good as the original stop-motion hairy ape doll, but it still made sense that someone would attempt the remake. However, based on the technology improvement theory, I still can’t understand how Disney managed to screw up Tron: Legacy. They should have just stuck with re-doing the original story instead of trying to extend the original into the future. Well, you can’t win them all.
To read the rest of my story – click here…
brainsnorts inc. 
I thought that in the Star Trek franchise – the recent remake of the Wrath of Kahn” had just enough twists to make it work, like in he original Kirk bellows “Kahn” in rage and in the remake Spock does it.
Most remakes are because Hollywood is afraid of originality.
yup. afraid of originality. completely agree. why try something new when we can give people the comfort of seeing what they already saw, just with new faces?
I hate when they remake a film and rename it. Frankly Cruel intentions is no Dangerous Liaisons.
never noticed that was a remake, but i never saw dangerous liaisons. now i have to watch it. thanks!
Only watch it if you like period films.
i remember when it was in theaters, i think an oscar winner, which happens to a lot of period pieces for some strange reason.