Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Forgive me if this was a previous thread or a thread somewhere else....

but I just saw the trailer for this remake of Craven's introductory movie and got all hot n bothered! I love the original.. very 70's? yes! It is! But I don't care.. it was a great story and I fell in love with it.. and now that it's being updated and looks even MORE suspenseful... I can't wait!!

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/01/08/last-house-on-the-left-movie-trailer/

I wasn't particulary a fan of the first remake from Craven but will be checking the new one out, looks decent. I also adore the guy, can never remember his name, who plays the lead bad guy in this remake and he was one of the terminators in Sarah Connor Chronicles.

I don't know. Maybe it's just me but i see no reason why this movie has to be Remade. I don't say this because im against remakes. I'm actually a fan of remakes. You don't have to remake, Last house on the Left to make the same movie. Like my opinion on the Karate Kid remake the subject material in, Last House on The Left is so broad. Girls are kidnapped and tortured....,this is is a formula that you can copy without remaking the movie. Of course the draw may not be as broad without the title but thats never stopped the dozens of other movies that copied the formula. I'll still see this movie because i'm a fan of realistic violence in film but i have to admit that the original never did much for me, other than a few memorable scenes.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
I don't know. Maybe it's just me but i see no reason why this movie has to be Remade. I don't say this because im against remakes. I'm actually a fan of remakes. You don't have to remake, Last house on the Left to make the same movie. Like my opinion on the Karate Kid remake the subject material in, Last House on The Left is so broad. Girls are kidnapped and tortured....,this is is a formula that you can copy without remaking the movie. Of course the draw may not be as broad without the title but thats never stopped the dozens of other movies that copied the formula. I'll still see this movie because i'm a fan of realistic violence in film but i have to admit that the original never did much for me, other than a few memorable scenes.

The first one was so hampered by the 70's, ya know? You just couldn't show what REALLY happened... now a days, you can get away with showing all the blood, gore, violence (torture, rape, what have you)

and yes, you can get a film with girls getting kidnapped and tortured in all sorts of movies, but really... what the story is about (what people are missing) is the parents.... it's not about the girls, not about the people that abducted them... it's about the parents and how the get their revenge... that's why I enjoyed the film so much... that's the true "Story" behind it.. the thugs went to the wrong house... "which house?"

The last house on the left.........

I think Craven's is a gem and a fascinating film. Not against this remake because there are improvements to be had over the 70's one.

Originally posted by BackFire
I think Craven's is a gem and a fascinating film. Not against this remake because there are improvements to be had over the 70's one.

Thank you! *sigh of relief* I'm glad someone see's my pov as well...

Give me The Virgin Spring anyday

You know, I've never seen Virgin Spring. Gonna add it to my netflix queue.

Do do, it's excellent. <------- Big Bergman fan here. Don't expect gore/violence though like in Craven's version lol.

This remake looks like it will hold its own against the original. Craven's film isn't that good.

March 13th is the release date, I assume this is for America.

Originally posted by deathbycorn
This remake looks like it will hold its own against the original. Craven's film isn't that good.

Very true.. I mean.. Craven's wasn't the best out there but it wasn't terrible... it fit the scheme for that era... I think..

LHOTL was very controversial for it's time. By today's standard's, it's pretty tame. I think that a remake could be, somewhat, interesting. I'll wait until DVD, however. I rarely go to the movie theater anymore.

i have no desire to see this, not even free

Saw it tonight. Wasn't bad. Better than I was expecting, it was actually pretty well made.

Kinda lost its way towards the end, though. Like they were too afraid to have the parents go all the way, which was too bad.

All the websites I frequent and trust seem to be liking it, especially commenting on the three leads of the family. It's not out till September here in Britain!! So probably will be a dvd watch for me when it's out in another country.

ill check it out

loved it up until they killed the first guy. then it went downhill after

The previews make it look like the daughter lived. If that's the case, I don't even want to see this cop out version.

Saw it last night

stoned

Does the daughter live? spoilers please. It's not out here till September!

Originally posted by MildPossession
Does the daughter live? spoilers please. It's not out here till September!

I'd like spoilers too - not too fussed about seeing this movie. Because if she does live I don't want to see the movie at all.

yup, she lives.

didnt ruin the movie for me though, cause i really dont give a ****

i just wanted to enjoy seeing people getting their ass kicked

Fanks Mairuzu!

The problem with her living is that it creates a sort of juggling situation for the parents. They want to get their daughter to safety but also get back at Krug and company for raping/torturing her. It took away a lot of that desperate 'i'm gonna **** you assholes up because I've lost everything' aspect that made the original so great - we didn't witness the parents in this lose their decency and become pure savages, instead they kept their decency, morality and humanity and there is no conflicting emotion in this one, which misses the point of the original entirely.

Originally posted by BackFire
The problem with her living is that it creates a sort of juggling situation for the parents. They want to get their daughter to safety but also get back at Krug and company for raping/torturing her. It took away a lot of that desperate 'i'm gonna **** you assholes up because I've lost everything' aspect that made the original so great - we didn't witness the parents in this lose their decency and become pure savages, instead they kept their decency, morality and humanity and there is no conflicting emotion in this one, which misses the point of the original entirely.

Perfectly stated.

After seeing how terrible the Halloween & Friday the 13th remakes were I'm avoiding remakes altogether. This remake will suck compare to the original due to the fact David Hess won't be in it. He was so convincing in the original. All these remakes.....sad what the horror genre has been reduced to.

Could not agree more Cropsy! However, I'll admit that I was quite impressed with how this one turned out, all things considering. One of the stronger/more effective entries into the remake frenzy to date in my opinion.

I like how you keep moaning yet you still watch the remakes, you moaned an awful lot before Friday the 13th was released yet you still watched a remake.

You will never know if the Last House on the Left remake sucks, since you of course will not be watching any remakes from now on...

It's decent compared to other remakes out there, but it's not nearly as powerful as the original.

From the looks of it, there are a lot of scary movies that I haven't seen yet. Most of them look very thrilling, even this one the Last house of the left. I am really not sure what to expect, but tonight i will find out.






My Good Old Life

I thought the original was god awful. So I didnt even bother with this remake.

Probably the best horror remake I've seen to date... kinda ruined it with the dumb microwave thing though. Oh yes, the original was much more brutal in my eyes for many reasons:
1) Girly #1 didn't die
2)Mom did not eat sausage
3)No playing with guts
4)No forced lesbian sex
5) Tweeny #2 got to die without being raped

The girls in the remake got off easy.

This movie is incredible. I don't know what you b1tches in complaining about. Personally, i like to see more movies where the good guys win. I had no problem with this movie. The film itself was a thousand times better than the original. Seriously, the original hasn't exactly aged well, nor was it ever a very good movie to begin with. The concept was brilliant but it was executed horribly. I thought this rape scene was much more powerful than the original and it even came close to Irreversible for me. I don't think the movie missed the point by having the daughter survive. The parents still embraced the savage side of humanity when they decided to systematically murder the culprits. Most people would have been more concerned with getting their daughter to safety and away from danger. They didn't simply kill the criminals, they tortured them. There would have been a difference had they simply walked up on them in their sleep and shot them, no, they made them suffer...,big difference. The girl surviving also gives a powerful message for people, that, anything is possible as long as you don't give up. I really don't think there is any aspect of the original that is better than the remake. It is hard for me to get through the original because it's rather boring and corny, this one, however, is actually a good film.

And then of course there's the microwave scene which was too goofy and over the top and nearly ruined the otherwise decently dark tone of the film.

The corniness of the original is one of its great strengths, it means when the film gets going and we see the horrors it catches us completely by surprise because the tone was otherwise fairly light and silly up until that point.

And as said, having the daughter live really does alter the point of the film entirely. In the original the parents lose their decency and humanity and become pure savages no better than those they are attacking. In this they still had the moral high ground which makes it much less conflicting, actually not at all conflicting. The original you rooted for the parents but in the end when they achieve their goal you realize that it was all for nothing, the daughter is still dead and their vengeance just caused them to lose something else in the process. The remake has none of that at all, no conflicting emotions about the parents seeking revenge, no statement about the nature of revenge or its pointlessness, and none of the original's exploration of the nature of violence and its infectious way. This one was just somewhat safe. It lacked the heart and soul of the original, and that's really the biggest thing it had.

You're right, partner. You make some very excellent points and i really don't mean to tear apart anyones movie. I'm just very biased towards this comparison because, i personally saw very little in the original other than a shock fest. As much as i appreciate movies that push the boundaries to press the limits, i just never felt that 'Last House on the Left' had any message other than justifiable revenge. I respect what you took away from the original and and it's rather insightful but do you really think that is implied? Or is that what you took away from it? Personally, i see the daughter surviving, having a stronger message. The fact that the parents chose to do what they did raises enough questions. The brutality of their acts were atrocious, if not agreeable. I would expect the parents to take revenge immediately after finding out about their daughters death. The fact that she survived in the remake, however, showed that they chose to embrace that hatred, anger and urge for justice over the safety of their daughter.

Look, you find out your daughter is dead, you don't care. You don't care what happens next. all you want is justice. You want the people responsible to suffer. You don't think about consequences. If your duaghter is alive, however, and you know that all she needs in order to get better is the care of a hospital. I believe you have much more to think about. I think the consequences of your murderous ambitions would weigh a bit more clearly in your mind, not only for the sake of your daughters future, but also for her immediate safety. So, for you to choose to seek justice and revenge before finding safety, i think, shows just how bloodthirsty our sense of justice can be.

and yeah, the microwave scene was a bit much, but it was still funny, eh

Yes, you said it right there. If your daughter is dead you don't care, you just want to inflict harm. That's exactly the point of the original, to show how pointless such revenge is. I love the original cuz no one gets off the hook. The villains all die, and the parents still suffer. It all just becomes a big messy violent disaster for everyone involved.

That was the point, really. It attempted for the first time really to show violence as truly messy and without much purpose and without satisfaction. It was made during the Vietnam War when horrid images were streaming to people on their TV's and they go right on eating their dinners, these guys wanted to make a film to try and show how awful violence really was, and with it how pointless vengeance is.

The original has some very large flaws, obviously. The remake is more well made - better acting, a larger budget and a stronger atmosphere, but the rawness of the original only worked in its favor, gave it a sorta of rough documentary feel that was very important to the film's success.

All that I just said is definitely implied in the film. It's a film with a meaning and a point and that attempts to explore themes and ideas.

I dont know partner. I'm still not convinced that Craven is that deep of a guy. I know he speaks these things but i think the thoughts came after the fact. To me it is nothing more than a vengeful shock flick. When i say that you wouldn't care, i mean you would no longer care about societies morales or laws (at least i would assume). Knowing that your daughter was raped and murdered would and should instigate a sense of rage and an urge to find personal justice. I understand that the parents felt shitty after doing what they did and that is one thing the remake lacked but i don't think the original did any better at implying that. I really do not think that Craven knew what he wanted to say with that movie and everything that people took away from it was due to their own insight. The message should have been, Violence begets violence and it;s only after the fact that you have acted on these instincts that you realize you would have been better off taking the more righteous path. Both movies are nothing more than fun rides to me and i see the latter being more entertaining. Obviously, it is better because it's more professional but thats thanks only to the amateur ambitions of the first.

I respect what your saying and i dig it, i just didn't see it when i watched it. I tell you what though. I'm going to watch that bastard again tonight. Maybe now, i will see something i didn't before. I'm gonna let you know if i see anything different, knowing your perspective...,not that you would be wrong if i didn't. I'm glad it blew your skirt up but i just don't see it being as important a movie as everyone makes it out to be.

Craven's earlier films definitely have meaning to them. Hills Have Eyes does as well. It's not like he's Shakespeare though. For Last House he was basically a young frustrated hippy who was sick and tired of violence and war so made a film to show how awful it actually is.

But, perceived meanings aside the movie is absolutely, on a historical level, very very important to the genre. It's important to keep in mind when it was made. Nothing like it had come before it, when it came out it pushed the envelope further than anything else in both the violence is showed and the tone in which it was shown. It was made before TCM, Halloween, and all the other big ones that get credit.

It's cool that you're giving it another chance, but really the film is not one for everyone. Lots of people just don't like it, and that's fine.

One thing that I don't get is calling the orginal cheesey or tacky.

The first part of the move ( to me ) was an obvious satire of the happy-go-lucky American family that was shown 50's-60's sitcoms like Leave It to Beaver and The Brandybunch. The corny music and corny acting were all a set-up in order to make the last part extremely, shocking violent and perverted.

This movie was absolute crap and the director is a deviate.

Neat.

Oo another director better watch out, he will get a smash in the mouth...

You do know, that the director isn't the only one involved in making a film... if you say that about the director, it also includes the actors, script writers, Wes Craven, Sean Cunningham, the cinematographer and on and on.

Nose, not mouth.

The director tells the actors how to play out the scenes, and the director tells the camera man where to point the camera.

Watch the movie and tell me he isn't a deviate...

Yeah, nose...

The director isn't the only one who tells the camera where to point, the main camera operators have input, as do cinematographers and so on. Actors and actresses also give input when they can, they still play out the scenes, they chose to audition for the roles. Don't forget the script writer who thought it all up for everyone to work off.

They are all as bad as each other going by your remark...

Its not the script, its where the camera is pointed and what the director has chosen to focus on.

But anyway I've just looked at IMDB and the girl is 21 so what I'm saying is a bit unfair to the director.

I figured she was like 17 max, she has a flat chest!

So yeah I'm probably being a bit unfair and jumped the gun.

Your posts are funny.

And not in a good way.

Point being?

Things I Like
Rape
Baby Porn
Fetus Porn

Things I don't like
Consentual sex

Sarcastic or not, that is just wrong. And not in a good way.

But it feels so right.

On a slightly related note I just finished watching The Virgin Spring. The inspiration for the original Last House on the Left.

Amazing film.

The only way i can make a woman moan is by tossing her baby into power lines.











that one was for you, DBC

That's because Ingmar Bergman is amazing.