Saturday, February 12, 2011

Make vs. Remake: My Bloody Valentine

Make (1981):



Remake (2009):





It's been awhile since I've done this type of post, so let me start by explaining the ten-point-total system used in the final scoring.  Think of it as having ten gold pieces to be distributed on the opposing arms of a scale.  Based on which film version is preferred, the scales will be tipped--either slightly or significantly--in that direction (if both movies are valued on an equal level, they will each receive a score of 5).


The 2009 version of My Bloody Valentine definitely ups the ante when it comes to graphic violence (the opening sequence alone strews more grue than the original does in its entirety).  The kills are not just more spectacular, but startling and original as well.  Conversely, I felt like the victim's deaths (and the particular manner of their downfall) in the first film could be easily foreseen.

Whereas the remake goes heavy on the "Bloody," "Valentine" is much more relevant to the original (granted, the filmmakers do get a bit heavy-handed, even naming the town where the action takes place "Valentine Bluffs").  February 14th has an especial significance to the plot of the 1981 version, while in the remake the holiday is mostly incidental.

Honestly, the acting in the original isn't bad--it is abysmal (and all those Canadian accents! It was like watching the slasher equivalent of Strange Brew). The cast of the remake (including Jensen Ackles, Jaime King, and Kerr Smith) proves not just more talented but markedly more telegenic (also, those who like plenty of T&A served up with their splatter will savor the remake's extended sequence featuring a fully-tanned, birthday-suited Betsy Rue).

Even more gratuitous than that nude scene, though, is the remake's use of 3-D effects.  At times, it felt like the action of the film was put on pause in order to showcase a pointy weapon poking out from the screen.  A distracting gimmick that the film need not have resorted to.

The original is obviously indebted to Halloween (right down to the use of the I-camera to present the killer's p.o.v.), but the remake follows more of the Scream formula.  Everyone appears to be a suspect here; the identity of the masked, pickax-wielding maniac (someone other than deranged miner Harry Warden, who went on a killing spree years earlier?) forms a much more intriguing question in the remake.

The 2009 version also distinguishes itself with its noir elements.  Developing the love-triangle storyline from the original, the remake offers a shady sheriff who has impregnated the co-worker of his wife, who herself still pines for her old flame, who himself has just drifted back into town after disappearing for ten years following Harry Warden's bloodbath.  These various complications make for a highly entertaining plot.

In final account, the 2009 version is an exemplary entry into the slasher-film subgenre, and a much heartier piece of horror than the original:


Make: 2
                   \
                     \
                        Remake: 8

So what's your take?  If you'd like to share your thoughts on either of these two films, you can post a Comment below.

No comments: