, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You’ve heard the saying it gets better with age..but does it? And if so, does that hold just as true for films? Speaking to Horror fanatics (who might be able to help me out a bit more) what, with it’s seemingly on-going revival of remaking a film that was done just fine the first time around. **I’m serious, all you aspiring filmmakers or screen writers; if you must tackle something that has been done, AT LEAST make sure it was something that was done badly the first time around. Realize that your messing with something that holds a special place in cinema fanatics hearts and for gawd sakes, be careful with your “modern” interpretation.**

While I do plan on doing an actual review of the 2005 remake, I wanted to first take a look at the original 1953 version and come to a basic enough list of 5 things the remake will have to live up to/be judged against/have an overall comparison of. Then why not do a review of the original first? I could, but the sad matter of fact is, for the most part I will always side with the original version. Not to take away from some of the remade/rebooted or altogether re-incarnated versions; there are some I’ve enjoyed as well-put together interpretations of the classics. However I find the entire appeal of the old classics better in every sense. Yes, there are some who feel as though they can be a bit slow or not scary in the least. But then there are also some who get excited at the mere thought of boobies and blood being split…so you just do you and I can do me.

5. Marketing: A most minuscule thing to contribute towards a movie, I’ll admit. Then again to myself not exactly, seeing as how my house is adorned with gracious amounts of movie poster memorabilia, so obviously the art used to promote the movie matters in some way. If you happen to view enough of them you tend to notice the older ones are easily the braver in comparison to today’s. To think of one right off the top of my head, there’s an Omen poster that has the infamous impaling scene fronting. Of course, the fact that it was also a foreign poster helped in it being a bit more racy but that’s what makes them great and original. They weren’t afraid to put the Horror in your face. Compared to its 2005 counterpart the originals were much more alluring.

   4.  A classic ensemble of actors: I certainly don’t intend to take away from ANY actors in the 2005 version. Remembering that this is purely my own thinking’s, I find that the actor/actresses of wonder years (no, not the TV series) were better almost because of the luck of the era being born into. In Horror movies now it’s as though they often use nudity simply because they know of nothing better to put in it’s place and well hey, who doesn’t like looking at boobies for no reason? -_- The wardrobe in the 50’s, 60’s, even 70’s is timeless, tasteful and didn’t have to spend the majority of the time off it’s actors, with exceptions of course, here and there. Appearances by the original Morticia, Carolyn Jones and screen legend Charles Bronson greatly assisted in rounding out the great cast as well.

   3. Score:  Now, what’s the point of a set-up for a scary scene if it doesn’t have the right music to go along with it? NOTHING, I tell you. Off the top of my head Insidious was the most current movie that used a great soundtrack to follow the film, a bit TOO epic at times, but it got the point across rather nicely I thought. Usually we’re given “trendy,hip” music by cool “rock-alternative” bands…because it’s cool? I don’t know about you but I much rather prefer the beautifully orchestrated music or even the at times shrieking tones for the intended dramatic scenes. Whether it makes me jump back or not, it’s definitely a lost art in the Horror genre and adds a certain appeal not shown often enough.

  2. Plot/Story:  Summarizing the story as quickly and simply as I can; it begins showcasing a wax museum, panning to the man behind the figures Prof. Henry Jarrod (Vincent Price) working on a bust. Unfortunately stuck with a partner who wants nothing more than to collect insurance on the place, Matthew Burke (Roy Roberts) foils Jarrod’s plans of trying to sell by doing just that. Believing to be gone and letting time pass Jarrod makes his return with the promise to terrify and shock audiences with the art he will capture within his wax figures, all the while holding in a couple of secrets that get past most everyone except our heroine Phyllis Kirk. Wanting nothing more than to show the world beauty through his wax figures, more specifically with his masterpiece Marie Antoinette. On his quest to finding the perfect model, becomes entangled in a great murder mystery that transcends the typical slash and gore aspect of the genre and remains classic, in all sense of the meaning.

   1. Vincent Price: ‘Nuff said.                                                       I would watch this man act with blow up dolls in a garage setting with paper decorations. His voice, his attitude, his overall presence is one of a kind and he is a definitive attribute to the Horror genre.