Poltergeist Remake Gets The Go Ahead

Posted by on November 28th, 2006   Filed under: Movies

Okay, now seriously… can you think of a single classic horror movie that isn’t supposedly being remade right now? I can’t. Not one. (Someone help me out here!) I guess there had been talk of a Poltergeist sequel for a while now (Part 4, unless you count the TV series), but it has come out this week that the sequel has now been dropped by Sony in favour of a “straight up remake” of the original.

Truth be told, a remake probably has more commercial potential right now, but once again it’s going to depend on the creative team behind it. The scooper who reported this says the remake will be “pretty much frame-for-frame… Just think Hills Have Eyes“, which is interesting because The Hills Have Eyes is one recent remake I actually liked. Still, an exact remake does seem kind of pointless. As expected, it sounds like no one from the original will be involved… not Steven Spielberg, not Tobe Hooper, and not even Craig T. Nelson! (Apparently the sequel, on the other hand, would have had an appearance by his character.) I don’t know, I guess there’s not much else to say about this until more details are announced, but still… is anyone surprised?

» Related Link: Filmstalker



  • Henrik

    Come on Sean… You’ve heard of The Shining.

    Would you call Se7en a horror movie? That’s the only more modern classic I can think of, that’s not being remade.

    They aren’t remaking any Hitchcock movies either…Yet. Mostly they are remaking exploitational low-budget horror movies, and I think people tend to glorify the originals a little bit when talks of a remake come up. None of the movies are really any good, save perhaps The Thing but that’s a remake in the first place, so you can’t really make a case there.

    But the original Thing from another world (or whatever it was called) by Howard Hawks apparently is a very different movie from John Carpenter’s The Thing. So maybe somebody should ask Ronald Moore just which Thing he is planning on doing.

  • Michael Bay’s company is in the process of getting a remake of The Birds off the ground. No pun intended.

  • Henrik

    Yeah I know, that’s why I put the “Yet” on there.

    That’s one movie that actually is good, and would probably be tainted by a remake. Although if they (PLATINUM DUNES…*sigh*) do it, I think they should get Jon Avnet to direct it, because in his movie “The Core” there was a segment where a bunch of birds went crazy, and it was actually pretty effective.

  • Well you’ve said before that you’re not a horror fan, so of course you don’t think any of the movies being remade were any good to begin with. Are you saying the remakes are actually better though? I find that hard to believe.

    Good call on The Shining… remaking that one would take balls.

  • There was a Shining made for tv movie. As far as I know, Stephen King was happier with the made for tv version. I’m just about done reading the book, and I can see why he wasn’t entirely pleased with Kubrick’s version. It’s nothing like the book. Still an awesome movie though.

  • Henrik

    Well, when I say people glorify them, it’s not just because I don’t think they are necessarily masterpieces, but also because they do not represent a personal and unique vision formed within the mind of a genius, but just a by-the-numbers contrived formulaic plot-driven eploitational piece of popular fiction made first and foremost to reel in the cash.

    There are some exceptions. There are also some unique ideas among the movies. Every rule has exceptions. In those cases, my only point would be that the movies pretty much suck.

    I don’t necessarily mind this development though. I would much rather see them go frenzy on this genre, instead of the better movies that happen to be scary (not genre-movies is what I’m trying to say) like Alien. The Thing falls into this category as well, but is a remake itself.

  • Henrik

    The Shining is a boring movie, probably Kubrick’s worst. Not scary at all.

  • Zedd

    ….What the hell? The Shining is amazing. Seriously.

  • Henrik

    Well, if little girls, blood and an old woman is what scares you the most, then I guess it’s an awesome movie.

    If you like good acting though, be sure to avoid The Shining and for that matter, most of Jack Nicholson’s performances. Talk about going over the top unmotivated.

    Oh, and another pet peeve of mine. “Heeeere’s Johnny”? When the fuck in the movie has anybody called him Johnny?

    I can’t figure out what The Shining is about. And I’m pretty sure I can’t figure out what 2001 is about either, but at least I feel in good hands while watching it. And HAL is a far better character than anything in The Shining.

    I pretty much ignore that movie in my head when I think of Kubrick. However, it does serve as a reminder that he too was only human.

  • It’s not the little girls, blood and old woman that are suppose to make the Shining scary. It’s the idea of your father/husband going crazy and trying to kill you…or the idea of being that father/husband and realizing you’re losing your mind and might end up hurting your kid/wife.

    If there’s any movie that requires an over-the-top performance, it’s this one.

    “Heeeeeeere’s Johnny!” is in reference to Ed McMahon’s famous introduction for Johnny Carson.

  • The Shining as made for TV? This is news to me….talk about learning something new every day…

  • Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining wasn’t made for tv.

    http://imdb.com/title/tt0118460/

    It was a 1997 mini-series directed by Mick Garris, creator of the Masters of Horror cable series. Steven Webber played Jack, and apparently it’s a more faithful adaptation of the book.

  • Henrik

    Personally I find the father in Squid and the Whale to be infinitely scarier than Jack Nicholson’s overthetop insanity.

    Even if the line is a reference it’s still retarded. How does it apply? That would be like him saying “The horseman comes and tonight he comes for you” or something like that… It makes no sense.

    If he had been watching a VHS tape over and over with that soundbite in it, because it was all the entertainment they could find, and we had been introduced to that line and heard it over and over, gradually becoming more and more a representation of his own insanity, it would have worked much better.

  • Hmmm, i think setting up a back story to his use of ‘Heeeerreee’s Johnny!’ would’ve been a little contrived. Even if you think it’s cheesy, it’s considered one of the most memorable quotes from the film and has been spoofed in numerous films and television shows.

    “Personally I find the father in Squid and the Whale to be infinitely scarier than Jack Nicholson’s overthetop insanity.”

    Teen pregnancy and AIDS are also much scarier than Jack Nicholson’s over the top insanity, but this is a horror movie. Not an after school special.

  • Henrik

    “Teen pregnancy and AIDS are also much scarier than Jack Nicholson’s over the top insanity, but this is a horror movie. Not an after school special.”

    Which is why I brought up all the standard horror elements in the movie (little girls, ominous blood), to which you replied that that wasn’t what it was about.

    It’s not that I think the line is cheesy, it’s just that it comes out of nowhere and somehow is supposed to have this emotional punch or whatever? Like it literally makes no sense that he would just scream out something like that. That’s why I think maybe some sort of set-up (not necessarily what I conjured up, lord knows I’m no Kubrick) would have made it at least make sense.

  • I’m not denying that it isn’t a psychological horror film. I’m saying that the images of the little girls and blood were for me, not the creepiest parts of the film. The hotel is haunted, but this isn’t just a haunted house movie.

    As for the line coming out of nowhere…he’s going insane. He may tend to spew shit that doesn’t make sense.

  • Henrik

    Is the hotel haunted? Or is all in his head? Either way, I think we can all agree: Nobody cares.

    Nah seriously, if you thought the movie was scary, I guess that’s alright. If the Johnny line made you grip your seat with anxiety, then I can see why you would defend its presence, even if it doesn’t necessarily make sense. Sometimes a movie can work emotionally without having to work intellectually. It just didn’t work for me at all, which I was pretty sad about because that was one of the only horror movies I thought would have a chance of working for me, and actually be worth watching.

  • Yes, the hotel is haunted. There’s no question about it. And lots of people care, it’s one of Stephen King’s best selling and most critically acclaimed books. Many people consider Kubrick’s film an epic horror masterpiece. Make no mistake, fans of the film do care. YOU don’t care. And that’s fine.

    And no, i didn’t necissarily find the film scary, but I don’t find many films scary in general. I’m saying that for me, the main focus of the film is the family and Jack slowly losing his sanity, not the ghostly images. But his breakdown is different then the breakdown of Jeff Daniels character in the Squid and the Whale because The Shining is a genre film. He’s trying to kill his family in a haunted hotel. It’s apples and oranges.

  • Henrik

    The first part was meant as a joke… Allthough I do think that some of the scenes where he is at the bar, and the ending as well makes you wonder wether or not it’s the hotel that’s screwed up, or if it’s the character.

  • I think it’s the combination of the two.

  • ANONYMOUS

    What are they doing?! Poltergeist is PERFECT just the way it is!! They need to leave it alone! Seriously! I cannot believe they’re getting away with this! Please somebody: make an online petition to help prevent this remake from ever seeing the light of day!

  • There are a bunch of people disputing this rumour so I’d take it with a grain of salt at the moment. More info here:

    http://www.poltergeistiii.com/poltergeistIV.html