“It’s a re-adaptation, not a remake.”

Someone please explain the damn difference? I am sorry, but here goes Hollywood again f*cking up another excellent movie from the 1970’s in ‘The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, this time starting Denzel Washington and John Travolta. I just watched the trailer and I am not really sure what to think. Based on previous remakes…errr…re-adaptations, I can’t see this storyline being as solid as the 1974 version. Then again, what “re-adaptation” has been good, if not better than the original. Yeah, I know you all can come up with some.

Being into trains now and having first hand knowledge and experience at moving trains, I was quite impressed with the detail and technology in the ’74 version of Pelham. Hell, I would not be at all surprised if some of that technology we still use in my everyday job. I am sure Tony Scott has made changes to the original version of the film, yet some of the sequences will be off the realism chart, as usually is the case. Scott has some credibility with me, films like ‘Man on Fire’ and ‘The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford’ are two great movies. But why remake another classic in, ‘The Warriors?’

I guess Hollywood, like game developers are out of original ideas. The only way to earn a buck any longer is to remake previous successful movies (games), update their storyline, use some fancy CGI and big name actors and blam! You got a hit. Of course this trend will continue, Scott is not the only director at fault and I guess I won’t fault him quite yet. I will give the movie a chance and see it, although I won’t pay top dollar at the theater, but wait for to come out on Netflix. Got any comments as to what you think of this or any other remade Hollywood movie?