'50s B-movie updates, gruesome Stephen King adaptations, and Paris Hilton's starring role
in a slasher.
Some horror remakes really put the originals to shame.
Warning: This video contains fast, flashing images.
Viewer discretion is advised, especially for those with photosensitive epilepsy .
A lot of different people have tried bringing the tale of Dracula to the silver screen since
Bram Stoker's seminal novel was published in 1897.
There are plenty of gems among the Universal "Dracula" films in which the titular character
was played by Bela Legosi.
Christopher Lee's Hammer "Dracula" films are also pretty fantastic.
But Francis Ford Coppola's adaptation, which was released in 1992, is a masterpiece.
"Vampires do exist."
Stoker's novel is a gothic romance, mixing lust, tragedy, and horror to great effect.
Coppola's film breathes life into the text, making many of its most memorable moments
into something even more stunning.
Gary Oldman plays Dracula, who appears as both a ravishing warrior king with a killer
sense of fashion and a bizarre old man with buns atop his head and a fetish for frills.
He discovers the reincarnation of his lost love in the young Mina Harker, played by Winona
Ryder, though her husband Jonathan, played by Keanu Reeves, will stop at nothing to try
and save her from his supernatural clutches.
"Bram Stoker's Dracula" features awe-inspiring tableaus, costume design by the inimitable
Eiko Ishioka, and Oldman's Dracula facing off against Anthony Hopkins as the vampire
hunter Van Helsing.
The 1992 adaptation is a sensuous visual feast that simply can't be topped.
It's unlikely you've seen the 1960 version of "Little Shop of Horrors," unless you were
duped by the cover art pretending that Jack Nicholson is the star.
As a result, 1986's musical starring Rick Moranis, Ellen Greene, and Steve Martin remains
the ultimate "Little Shop of Horrors."
Featuring music from Disney renaissance legends Alan Menken and Howard Ashman and directed
by Miss Piggy and Yoda himself, Frank Oz, everything about 1986's "Little Shop of Horrors"
is an absolute marvel.
Ultimately, it's the masterful puppeteering work of Audrey II that makes the film truly untouchable.
Thanks to Oz's background working with the Jim Henson Company, he was able to wrangle
some of the best puppeteers in the business.
Oz's film is a love letter to the B-movie roots of the original film that elevates absolutely
every element to perfection.
Moranis and Greene are superb leading players, and it's impossible to hear "Suddenly Seymour"
without wanting to sing to your heart's content.
George A. Romero's 1973 horror flick about a town plunged into chaos when a military
bio-weapon is accidentally unleashed on its populace isn't a zombie film per se.
Instead of dying, his characters are transformed into deranged, ungovernable nut-jobs.
The military attempts to restore order, but they only exacerbate the situation.
Romero's notion of regular, seemingly reasonable Americans becoming suddenly unhinged has plenty
of potential, but budgetary constraints, slack pacing, and poor performances undermine his
film at every turn.
Breck Eisner's 2010 remake of "The Crazies" is superior in every regard.
The film hooks viewers with its all-too-believable opening scene, in which the town drunk wanders
onto a baseball field with a shotgun, and it only gets creepier from there.
Timothy Olyphant is hugely sympathetic as David, a small-town sheriff who escapes a
military-imposed quarantine to rescue his pregnant wife.
When the infected townspeople overwhelm their captors, our presumably immune heroes scramble
to evade the growing number of crazies and the remaining soldiers who've been ordered
to execute all civilians.
As it turns out, the child of former Disney CEO Michael Eisner is a more than proficient
horror filmmaker.
His spare, widescreen compositions conjure a slow-mounting sense of dread, making "The
Crazies" unmissable.
Stephen King has been one of the unquestioned kings of horror storytelling for decades,
but many adaptations of his stories have failed to live up to the source material.
The original "It" miniseries featured an incredible performance from Tim Curry as Pennywise, but
was ultimately a compromised version of King's sprawling horror epic.
Warner Bros. finally gave Pennywise his time to shine in 2017 when director Andy Muschietti's
"It" arrived in theaters, shattering expectations and box office records.
"Now you're the one who's afraid."
Muschietti opted to divide the huge novel into two parts, with the first film focusing
on The Losers Club as kids in Derry, Maine, in the '80s.
As a result, 2017's "It" was able to tap into childhood nostalgia for the decade, offering
a certain charm not unlike "Stranger Things."
The movie was also aided greatly by a stellar performance from Bill Skarsgård as Pennywise
the Clown.
While 2019's "It Chapter Two" was always going to have a near-impossible task, that takes
nothing away from what the first film was able to accomplish.
Not only does it rank as a better remake, but it's quickly become one of the greatest
King adaptations ever made.
John Carpenter's "The Thing" is technically a remake of the 1951 sci-fi film "The Thing
From Another World," but it has some major narrative differences that place it a step
above its predecessor.
Both films are based on the story "Who Goes There?"
by John Wood Campbell Jr, but Carpenter's version is a more successful adaptation in
terms of remaining true to the source material.
For instance, Carpenter's "The Thing" includes the alien creature's ability to shapeshift,
while the 1951 version does not.
The Thing's ability to assume the shape of other lifeforms is a major source of tension
in Carpenter's film, fueling the distrust and paranoia the crewmembers have for one another.
Additionally, "The Thing" is simply just scarier than its black-and-white ancestor.
"The Thing from Another World" has some unintentionally hilarious moments that were probably more
terrifying when it was made, that don't hold up all these years later.
For instance, the creature in the original film is just a guy in a goofy costume.
Meanwhile, the creature in "The Thing" still looks absolutely disgusting and horrifying
30 years after the film's debut.
1980's "Friday the 13th" is easily one of Sean S. Cunningham's worst directing efforts.
The dialogue and characterizations are listless, the script repeatedly telegraphs its major
plot twist, and the film often looks shockingly amateurish.
The true star of the 1980 original is makeup effects legend Tom Savini, whose inventively
bloody kills were the main reason the film was able to separate itself from its competition.
The fact that the Michael Bay-produced 2009 remake of "Friday the 13th" outclassed its
predecessor in terms of filmmaking is hardly surprising.
If anything, it's a little too sleek for a slasher flick.
Fortunately, the screenplay was written with tremendous affection by franchise fans Damian
Shannon and Mark Swift, who turn Jason Voorhees into a more hulking, brute-force predator
than he was in the previous movies.
In fact, this might be the only time outside of "The Final Chapter" that Jason has been
truly scary.
While the remake was a box-office success, it failed to spawn a single sequel.
David Cronenberg is responsible for more than his fair share of genre classics, including
"Scanners" and "Videodrome."
But the filmmaker arguably gave us his crowning achievement in 1986 with his remake of "The Fly."
It's entirely possible that, without this remake, the original 1958 film might have
run the risk of being buried by the sands of time.
Cronenberg took the concept to another level and pulled precisely no punches, leaning into
the horrific nature of the premise and giving us some of the greatest body horror and creature
effects of all time.
This serves to make his version at once unrelentingly engaging, yet difficult to watch.
Jeff Goldblum anchors the film as scientist Seth Brundle, who is building a teleportation device.
Even though his creation seemingly works, the unexpected inclusion of a fly during his
first successful human test turns his dream into a nightmare.
What follows is a gripping, heartbreaking, and disgusting tale as Brundle is slowly taken
over by the fly's DNA, turning into a gigantic, hideous man-beast.
Goldblum's performance certainly goes a long way to help elevate this film.
Geena Davis, who plays Brundle's girlfriend Veronica, also deserves a tremendous deal
of credit as she has to follow him down this horrifying rabbit hole.
Along with their stellar performances, some impressively disturbing visuals make this
version of "The Fly" leaps and bounds better than its predecessor.
In his 1960 film "13 Ghosts," William Castle invented "Illusion-O," a way for audiences
to see moments with ghosts in 3D using cellophane filter glasses.
This required audiences to look through either the red or blue lenses at the same time.
The red filter intensified the ghosts, and the blue filter let the audience watch without
the scare.
It was a clever gimmick, and the only real reason to revisit 1960's "13 Ghosts" today,
because as a whole, the film isn't particularly scary or well-crafted.
As a result, Steve Beck's 2001 remake of "Thir13en Ghosts" is a far superior film.
"How close is it?"
"Close enough to hurt you. Go, go! No, no, no!"
Drawing on the gimmicky energy of a William Castle flick, the ghosts in the remake are
visible only when the characters wear special glasses.
The addition of the Black Zodiac provided thirteen of the scariest and most inventive
ghost designs in horror history.
The stakes feel real for all of the characters, simply because the ghosts look so believably menacing.
"Thir13en Ghosts" was greatly misunderstood at the time of release and panned by critics,
but it's since garnered a cult following of die-hard fans.
The original 1947 film adaptation of the novel "Nightmare Alley" is akin to an impressive
semi-functional prototype.
Meanwhile, Guillermo del Toro's 2021 remake is the fully realized device with all the
bells and whistles.
Neither film is bad, but the 2021 rendition is much more faithful to the source material.
It also greatly benefits from the strides in special effects and cinematic boundary-pushing
that have transpired since the original was released in 1947.
That said, del Toro's "Nightmare Alley" still manages to capture the visual spirit of film
noir with muted tones that create a sleek, foreboding ambiance throughout.
"I know you're no good."
Del Toro's "Nightmare Alley" also functions more effectively as a cautionary tale about
greed and deception.
Conversely, the original film omits several more controversial plot details from the novel,
like the tragically botched abortion.
It also leaves out Stan's willingness to forgo all decency and perform "spook shows" against
his mentor's warnings, which leads to the murder-suicide of a grieving couple.
The remake also allows Molly to escape a fully corrupt Stan, whereas the original has her
reappear in his life at his lowest point.
This severely undermines Stan's descent to the most inferior rung on the freak show ladder.
"The Ring" is one of the few exceptions.
While 2002's "The Ring" is extremely similar to Hideo Nakata's 1998 film "Ringu," Verbinski
added his own unique visual flair, and brought along a big Hollywood budget to make his version shine.
"You will die in seven days."
Praising Verbinski's accomplishment is made all the more difficult because the original
film is also really, really good.
2002's "The Ring" could have been a shot-for-shot remake of "Ringu" and still been somewhat
brilliant because of its killer concept and execution.
Instead, Verbinski traded Tokyo for Seattle and made his remake distinctly American while
still maintaining the universal themes of the original.
Naomi Watts anchors the film as journalist Rachel Keller, who begins investigating the
mysterious death of her teenage niece following a trip to a remote cabin.
There, she discovers the now-infamous cursed videotape that dooms its watchers to a horrific
death within seven days of viewing.
It goes without saying that "The Ring" is a glossy Hollywood version of its predecessor.
Watt's performance as a woman balancing motherhood, her job, and her own desires, is among her best.
The only downside to the success of 2002's "The Ring" is that a slew of American remakes
and sequels came in its wake, such as "The Grudge," "The Eye," and "Shutter."
Unfortunately, none of them would ever come close to the success of "The Ring."
The gelatinous menace of 1958 B-movie favorite "The Blob" is a lot creepier in theory than
in execution.
When it's first extracted from a meteorite by a curious old man, the creature only poses
a threat to those who handle it with their own flesh or who find themselves cornered
in a windowless room.
The gliding-and-sliding extraterrestrial becomes more concerning as it gets larger via each
person it consumes, but it's simply too slow to really scare anyone.
Chuck Russell and Frank Darabont remedied this with their spiffy 1988 remake.
Their Blob is an agile pink amoeba capable of firing off slimy tentacles that yank victims
into its corrosive core.
Basically, their Blob means business.
1988's Blob is also a biological weapon created by the U.S. military, which was launched into
space when it proved lethal to all of humanity.
Unfortunately, what went up came back down, and started feasting on the inhabitants of
idyllic Arborville, California.
The film zips through the pseudo-scientific exposition and keeps viewers on their toes
by killing off some of the film's most likable characters early on.
Strangely, Tony Gardner's monster is less memorable than its kills.
Then again, there's only so much one can do with a murderous mass of jelly.
As a result, it's probably best to showcase just how truly nasty it is to get caught in
the Blob's skin-and-bone dissolving clutches.
While the movie leaves open the potential for a sequel, "The Blob" was, sadly, an unmitigated
commercial disaster for Tri-Star.
The 2005 slasher "House of Wax" has barely any similarities to the 1953 original starring
Vincent Price, and this is absolutely to the benefit of Jaume Collet-Serra's updated interpretation.
The original, also a remake of 1933's "Mystery of the Wax Museum," was a landmark film in
horror history as the very first color 3D feature film from a major American studio.
But what makes 2005's "House of Wax" such a fantastic remake is that director Collet-Serra
leaned into the tropes of the 2000s slasher boom, and wasn't afraid to revel in the ones
that would define the era.
The film was famous for its "See Paris Die" marketing campaign, a reference to the promised
death of a character played by Paris Hilton.
"My mom was like, 'I thought it was really weird seeing my daughter like killed, but…'"
A cast featuring popular teen stars of the time, such as Chad Michael Murray from "One
Tree Hill," also bolstered interest in the film.
As a result, this solidified "House of Wax" as one of the strongest time capsule films
to capture the decade.
Compared to the original, the 2005 slasher is a lean, mean, face-ripping machine, and
a grotesquely stunning presentation of how digital effects can be used to enhance the
terror of practical creations.
The 2020 remake of "The Invisible Man" is unlike the 1933 original in every way aside
from the fact that it features an invisible man, and he's a horrible person.
The original is the classic tale of a scientist who gets more than he bargained for and is
driven mad as a result.
Meanwhile, the remake is a harrowing psychological thriller featuring a woman's efforts to escape
an abusive ex.
Although the original is good, the remake is better as it's more relatable and compelling.
Each movie requires a generous suspension of disbelief, but there's something a bit
more believable about the 2020 version.
For one, in 2020's "The Invisible Man," the horror is not merely derived from the concept
of an invisible madman.
Instead, viewers are subjected to the intensely emotional and psychological torment inflicted
upon Cecilia, played by Elisabeth Moss, throughout the film.
Director Leigh Whannell's 2020 remake amps up the horror by having everyone doubt Cecilia's
claims that she's being stalked by an invisible man.
This, in turn, makes everyone question Cecilia's sanity, leaving her all alone to deal with
an unseen and seemingly omnipresent threat.
Moss' character is forced to face abuse, harassment, and accusations of crimes and misdeeds she
didn't commit.
The fact that no one believes her is pretty terrifying in its own right, so the invisibility
aspect functions as an extra shot of espresso in an already terrifying movie.
The 2020 remake ends with revenge, while the original does not contain any sort of meaningful
or satisfying catharsis.
Finally, the remake is more engaging because the viewers are pulled into an intimacy with
the film's protagonist, as the audience is the only other party privy to her ex's sadistic games.
Throughout "The Invisible Man," viewers share in Cecilia's frustration, helplessness, and
rage, and root for to finally escape from the clutches of an invisible maniac.