Will the “Suspiria” remake be good?
I’ve thought long and hard about this one Grue-ling’s. I’m talking night’s spent alone in the corner of a dive bar knocking back shots of Old Grand Dad while Queensryche’s “Silent Lucidity” played on the jukebox.
Ok, so maybe I didn’t go that fucking far, but since the news, Dario Argento’s masterpiece was getting a remake broke, I’ve been wrestling with how I felt about it. I’m a big fan of the original.
If you’ve been hanging round these here parts awhile, you know I’m not a big fan of remakes. Not because I think remaking a film is wrong, (Though some films should be left alone…like this one.) but because time and time again they’ve proven to be just bloody fucking awful!
Prom Night, When a Stranger Calls, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Psycho, Last House on the Left (Still can’t believe someone even had the fucking balls to attempt that one.) Night of the Demons, etc, etc, etc.
The trail of shit goes on for miles.
Yeah, we’ve had a few decent ones: The Hill’s have Eyes, The Thing, Piranha, and a few others, but the ratio between good and bad remakes is waaaay in favor of bad.
Hollywood has a tendency to get people involved in these projects that often don’t respect the source material. They have no clue what made the original work and so end up delivering an unrecognizable mess that end’s up tarnishing the original’s reputation. It’s a vicious circle.
Well, the circle has come around again and this time 1977’s Suspiria is on the chopping block.
My first thought upon hearing the news was “Nope!”
I felt there was no fucking way Hollywood could replicate what made that film good. Studios today play it safe and follow a shitty formula designed to make cash, not good movies. Argento’s baby is far removed from any formula, and decidedly not safe.
“Suspira” is an interesting flick, one that’s studied in film classes worldwide. It defy’s film norms. The story is basic and at times disjointed and the acting is here and there. By all rights, this should be a bad film, but it’s regarded as a masterpiece. Why? Because Argento injected the film with an atmosphere that feel’s like a nightmare. The whole thing, start to finish play’s like a bad dream. Fucked up imagery and creepy ass music is placed perfectly throughout so as to keep the viewer on their toes. the whole experience is bizarre and by the time the credits roll you’re thinking “WTF?!”
So tell me, how in the blue hell, knowing how Hollywood does shit these days, can we expect anything even remotely decent? Can we really hope they’ll step outside the box to the place they need to go in order to replicate the visceral and otherworldly feel of the original?
I know, I’m shocked too, but let me explain.
It’s rare, but Hollywood has released some decent horrors over the years that journey into the space Argento basically created. “Black Swan“, “The 9th Circle“, and “The House of the Devil“, and even Rob Zombies often underrated “Lord’s of Salem” (Fuck you I dug it!) So it’s not unreasonable to at least hope.
Add to that some of the decisions that have been made regarding the remake.
First, they brought in Luca Guadagnino, an Italian director, to helm it. Who better than an Italian director to tackle an Italian film. My people’s horrors are…different. If you’re a fan you know what I mean and having someone who understands that kind of filmmaking as the director can really help. I feel the same about Japanese based films. It’s a culture thing.
Second, it’s R rated and heavy on the catsup judging from the clip recently shown at Cinema Con. It features a dancer literally going to pieces in a bizarre fashion which lines up with the original. refreshing considering all the PG-13 bullshit heaped on us these days.
Now I’ve listed why it may be at least halfway decent, but are there solid reason’s to think otherwise?
Did Liberace take it up the ass?
For one, I’m not thrilled it’s set in 1977. I know many of you like that for various reason’s. If it were an original film, I’d feel the same way, but it’s a remake. Why set it at the exact same time as the original? You’re basically making the exact same film. I like remakes to stick close to the source material, but I also want something to set it apart, else why bother remaking the fucking thing? Would have been interesting to see the film set in modern times. Ya know, same story, modern world.
The other issue is what I’ve seen so far from still shots. It doesn’t look like “Suspiria”.
I know it’s only a few shots and thus not fair to judge yet, but put side by side with shots of the original the contrast is stark. One look’s dark and bizarre, the other looks…meh. I can’t understate how important the visuals are to the original, it’s what make’s the fucking film! Everything and I mean EVERYTHING looked sinister. The house, the exterior locations, even the damn people! Every scene dripped with wrongness. Either it was the strange gothic backdrops or the insane use of colors, both absent from the shots I’ve seen. I hope I’m wrong because it’s this crucial element that will make or break this film.
So there we are, I’ve gotten this shit off my chest finally. Now what?
Well the trailer drops next week and we’ll be able to get a better idea of what to expect which will either fill us with more hope or kick us in the balls (Va gee gee for my female readers) with dread. Either way I’m gonna check it out because, maybe it’s the old age talking, but I’m working on this whole “open-minded” thing. Go figure.
Also, it has Chloe Grace Moretz and I love me some Chloe Grace Moretz.
One thing’s for sure, there is absolutely no way I’m going to be able to judge this flick apart from the original. It can’t be done. It has to nail what made Argento’s work or go home. Nuff said!
That’s my two cents. Love to know what my fellow Grue-ling’s think. Don’t be shy, speak ma freaks! Do you think it could be a good and faithful remake, or do ya think there’s not a chance in hell? Will you even bother with it? What say you?