The new Resident Evil movie is a movie that I could have waited for it to pop up on cable. It was not terrible but either a lack of star power or director skill made the movie a lot less than it could have been. I just felt like it should have been a lot more involving/interesting than it was. Maybe last weekend, I should have held a film in reserve for this weekend. (It is hard to explain why the movie fell so flat for me without giving more details about the plot and I am not sure it would be worth the effort. I knew I was not expecting a great film but I expected more than the movie delivered.)
I wonder why the studio is advertizing a movie, Priest, that won’t come out until next summer. It seems odd. I know it happens but it still seems a bit odd. At least the movie is similar enough to the Resident Evil movie that I can see why they’re advertizing it before the Resident Evil movie.
Here are the remake rules
rule 1 The more you like or love the orginial movie, the less likely you are to love the remake
rule 2 If you have not seen the original movie and you are interested in the remake, see the remake first
if there is a third rule, I am not sure what it is yet.
An example of rule 1 is Cape Fear. I think the original is pretty good and well the remake was almost over the top. I found the orginal more believable and more compelling. Perhaps I liked it too much to give the remake a fair chance and would have been better off skipping the remake.
The best example of rule 2 that I can think of 3;10 to Yuma. I saw the promos for the movie and I knew it was a remake but I had not seen the original film. I watched the remake in theaters and I enjoyed it a lot. Christian Bale was really good in that and so was Rusell Crowe. Later I picked up the original film on dvd and I enjoyed that one also.