Local movie buffs discuss the merit of film remakes

Consumers discuss their views on the remakes of classic movies and attempt to determine if the older versions are better or worse than the newer remakes.

Moviegoers are weighing in with their theories, ideas and prior knowledge on why production companies like Disney and Warner Brothers tend to revamp stories that their audience may have already seen.
Senior Matthew Sexton, who has noticed the company reboots through the “Star Wars” franchise and through the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
“For [many] corporate businesses that have recently acquired properties and want to reboot them, they try to get new fans solely applied for some dinero. [Production companies] just want money,” Sexton said.
Sexton believes that companies “have to run their corporations properly and get [the] correct funding for it.”
To do so the company needs to “revitalize the brand” they already have.
Other consumers tend to share the same realization as Sexton, saying that some movies can be seen as nostalgia bait or as a “money grab.”
However, there are some movie fans who see movie reboots as an improvement rather than just a quick way for movies to make money.
Senior Nicholas Gonce believes that characters with shows and movies from the 1960s, like DC comics’s “Batman,” need a reboot.
“When it comes to certain characters, I like the newer versions, because it’s more fitted for the time we live in,” Gonce said.
Gonce believes that, depending on the character that was used, how long it’s been since the character was last seen and the narrative the character follows, it may give it the opportunity to get rebooted.
A common belief is shared by senior Dylan Mayrides when it comes to the cartoon franchise, “Scooby-Doo.”
“[I preferred] the older versions, except maybe ‘Scooby-Doo’. The one series, ‘Mystery Incorporated,’ actually followed a linear plot and had an overarching story to that rather than just individual ‘Scooby-Doo’ episodes,” Mayrides said.
For junior Aminah James, there are occasions where the newer movies made the story seem more real, like Disney’s 2017 adaptation of “Beauty and the Beast.”
“I appreciate the live-action more than the original because I feel like the live-action gave me a lot more to visualize the actual beauty that was trying to be portrayed in the 2-D version,” James said. “I felt like the live-action gave me more of a perception of the luxury that the Beast had compared to what the 2-D animation tried to animate.”
James said that the newer version made pieces of the movie, like Belle’s bookcase and dress, items that the Beast gives to Belle, seem “more genuine.”
James shared the same opinion when the Beast was shown, explaining that the newer version “gratified [the Beast’s] ugliness more so than the 2-D animation which made him look more cartoony.”
“We saw that even though he did look like that, it more so enhanced Belle’s true feelings for him,” James said.
The more live-action adaptation of newer films isn’t always favored.
Technology education teacher Brian Ruth believes Disney is huge in revamping movies.
From the original Disney movies like Lion King and Aladdin to the “Star Wars” franchise, said that he prefers the hand-drawn style more.
“All the hard work that went into [the animation of certain films,] the people who drew that out and colored them all in, and now, digital work is very hard, but I have more appreciation for the hand-held tactile way of doing things,” Ruth said.
With all the dislike for the newer versions, junior Edward Odenwald believes there are cases where they show something different.
“Typically I prefer the older [movies] but there are some occasions where the newer ones bring new perspectives and they’re interesting,” Odenwald said.