1.
The original is a satire. It's about a trans-continental road race in which the drivers are awarded points for running over and killing ordinary members of the public; but because it's this big TV event, the ordinary public loves it. At the start of the film, everything is happening normally by the standards of this bizarre world, and the main focus is on building up the background of the race. There's a scene in which a fawning dead-eyed news personality is talking to the widow of the race's first victim, and telling her about all the fabulous prizes she's won; and while the woman is obviously upset over the loss of her husband, she's also talking about how wonderful it is and how much he was a fan of the race, etc. It's only once things get moving and the characters get established that they take over as the focus of the story.
The remake is not a satire. It's about a racing driver who gets caught in a conspiracy, framed for murder, and sent to a prison where he's forced into a gladiatorial car race in which inmates try to kill each other. There's some bullshit about it being a privately run prison which makes its money off the TV rights (most of which is given to us in a lazy text scroll at the beginning) but that's mostly just background noise. From start to finish, this is the story of one man's revenge. Except it sort of forgets that about itself by the end, and the pay-off turns out to be a really indirect, implausible, poorly-executed afterthought.
2.
In the original, when we're introduced to Frank, it's as the corrupt product of a corrupted world. He's a bad guy; a killer with no regard for human life, even his own; someone to be feared. There's a marvelous moment in which his navigator asks him if winning is the only thing he cares about, to which he replies, "Yes, it's the only standard of excellence left". But over the course of the film, we see that there's a whole lot more to him than that; and the revelation redeems him.
In the remake, Frank (like everyone else) gets precisely zero character development. Not only does he not need redemption, because he never does anything wrong, but they also establish him as a bad-arse from the get-go, so we never see him make the journey from everyman to action-hero either. Also, I can't remember a fuckin' thing he says during the whole movie. Probably because I didn't hear half of it.
3.
The original has good audio balance.
In the remake, the sound effects and music are 800 times louder than the dialogue, which is all mumbled in menacing-but-barely-decipherable undertones.
4.
In the original, a lot of the character and plot development happens during the race scenes. In fact, almost every scene has a point and progresses some element of the story.
In the remake, almost all of the plot and character development happens in the race breaks. The race scenes themselves are mostly just long laborious action sequences in which nothing moves except for the cars.
5.
In the original, the drivers are a colourful collection of characters. Not only do they each have a gimmick and a car to match, but they're also granted distinct personalities which we're shown enough of that they all become likable characters in their own right.
In the remake, all the cars are black & grey, and all the characters are interchangeable psychos whose only differentiating feature is ethnicity.
6.
There's a scene in the original in which Frank meets one of his fans. It's only small, but it's actually quite touching and adds a fair bit of depth to the story.
There's nothing comparable in the remake. The remake lacks any sort of depth.
7.
The original uses sounds and visuals to create atmosphere and convey information appropriate to the story.
The remake looks and sounds like it wants to be a rap-metal music video.
8.
There's a scene in the original in which Frank's navigator has to climb out onto the roof of the car to fix something. It's a scene that helps establish the power dynamic in the relationship between the two leads -- which is the most important relationship in the movie.
There's a similar scene in the remake, that looks like a reference to the first film; only it doesn't establish anything. It's just there to add a little bit of extra tension to an extended action sequence. Also, Frank's navigator isn't really a lead character in this movie, and their relationship never really goes anywhere, or seems to be of any great significance.
9.
All of the over-the-top graphic violence in the original is contextually appropriate to making a point about America's attitudes towards violence in entertainment. And even though it has several nude scenes, it still comes off as less sleazy than the remake.
All of the over-the-top graphic violence in the remake serves as gratuitous titillation for a presumed audience of idiots, who just want to see fast car, hot girls, blood and explosions. Essentially, making the remake part of the thing the original was poking fun at.
10.
I really like the original.
I think the remake sucks donkey's balls.
Sorry, I know that last one was crap, but I ran out at nine. So to make up for it, here's a question instead:
I know that there's always been bad movies around; but do you reckon there's more movies getting made these days where you feel like you're being told a story by an eight year old? Like, rather then constructing a narrative that engages the audience on a central theme, or premise, or concept, or idea, or question; it's more just a description of a sequence of events that wanders off into distraction whenever something "cool" happens, and then can't even remember what it was talking about by the time it wants to wrap things up?
It can't just be my imagination, can it?
 |
| No? Cheers Frank. |
No comments :
Post a Comment