10 Pointless Movie Remakes That Had No Reason To Exist

HomeReviews

10 Pointless Movie Remakes That Had No Reason To Exist

The word “remake” doesn’t have to be a derogatory one, as there are many examples of redoing the same film and finding success. John Carpenter’s The

‘Marty Supreme’ Makes Surprise World Premiere As New York Film Festival Secret Screening
‘The Blues Brothers’ Quotes That Never Get Venerable: the 8 Most Celebrated Lines From the Classic Film
MuppetVision 3D pieces return in Disney World’s Muppets-themed Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster preview

The word “remake” doesn’t have to be a derogatory one, as there are many examples of redoing the same film and finding success. John Carpenter’s The Thing is a horror classic that supersedes the original 1951 film, Ocean’s Eleven from Steven Soderbergh was a far classier take on a “Rat Pack” star vehicle, the Coen brothers’ version of True Grit was actually close to the novel, and Martin Scorsese’s The Departed significantly adjusted the themes of Infernal Affairs to create an instant classic in the gangster genre that won the Academy Award for Best Picture.

A remake should exist if it has the opportunity to significantly improve upon or change something about the original film, but it shouldn’t occur purely to bait nostalgia. Unfortuantely, many remakes are made just to cash in on a popular name, and don’t have a legacy of their own.

10

‘Robocop’ (2014)

A still from the 2014 remake of RoboCop.

Robocop is one of the most rewatchable films of the ‘80s, and its a lot smarter than it is often given credit for. Paul Verhoeven satirized American media and consumerism with his ruthless analysis of corporate culture, and infused some Biblical themes into the story of how the police officer Alex Murphy (Frank Weller) is resurrected into a cyborg hero.

The Robocop remake cuts out all of the satire for the sake of making a bland dystopian film, and it doesn’t do enough to flesh out what Murphy goes through, even if Joel Kinnaman is trying his best with the material. Worst of all, the Robocop remake is PG-13; there’s no point in making a film in the franchise if it can’t include the ultra-violence that is inherent to the themes, as even the bad Robocop sequels were able to pull that off.

9

‘Total Recall’ (2012)


Total Recall
Image via Sony

Total Recall is another Verhoeven classic that was compeely neutered when it was remade because Len Wiseman didn’t have the same imaginative eye for action and worldbuilding. The original Total Recall is a genuinely thought-provoking psychological thriller that questions the nature of reality and says something about projections of escapist fantasies; it’s one of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s best performances, and the remake sadly wasted the talents of Colin Farrell by giving him one of the most tedious character arcs imaginable.

In addition to being PG-13, the Total Recall remake felt less imaginative because it didn’t even go to Mars, and simply felt like just another totalitarian sci-fi thriller. Given that the film has almost no interest in looking beyond the surface of anything that Verhoeven had done with the original, it might as well have not even been called Total Recall.



















































Collider Exclusive · Sci-Fi Survival Quiz
Which Sci-Fi World Would You Survive?
The Matrix · Mad Max · Blade Runner · Dune · Star Wars

Five universes. Five completely different ways the future went wrong — or sideways, or up in flames. Only one of them is the world your instincts were built for. Eight questions will figure out which dystopia, galaxy, or desert wasteland you’d actually make it out of alive.

💊The Matrix

🔥Mad Max

🌧️Blade Runner

🏜️Dune

🚀Star Wars

01

You sense something is deeply wrong with the world around you. What do you do?
The first instinct is often the truest one.





02

In a world of scarcity, what resource do you guard most fiercely?
What we protect reveals what we believe survival actually requires.





03

What kind of threat keeps you up at night?
Fear is useful data — if you’re truthful about what you’re actually afraid of.





04

How do you deal with authority you don’t trust?
Every dystopia has a power structure. Your approach to it determines everything.





05

Which environment could you actually endure long-term?
Survival isn’t just tactical — it’s physical, psychological, and very much about where you are.





06

Who do you want in your corner when things fall apart?
The company you keep is the clearest signal of who you actually are.





07

Where do you draw the line — if you draw one at all?
Every survivor eventually faces a moment that tests what they’re actually made of.





08

What would actually make survival worth it?
Staying alive is one thing. Having a reason to is another.





Your Fate Has Been Calculated
You’d Survive In…

Your answers point to the world your instincts were built for. This is the universe your temperament, your survival instincts, and your particular brand of stubbornness were made for.


The Resistance, Zion

The Matrix

You took the red pill a long time ago — probably before anyone offered it to you. You’re a systems thinker who can’t facilitate but notice the seams in things.

  • You’re drawn to understanding how the system works before figuring out how to break it.
  • You’d find the Resistance, or it would find you — your instinct for spotting constructed realities is the machines’ worst nightmare.
  • You function best when you have access to information and the freedom to act on it.
  • The Matrix built an airtight prison. You’d be the one probing the walls for the door.


The Wasteland

Mad Max

The wasteland doesn’t reward the clever or the well-connected — it rewards those who are tough to kill and harder to break. That’s you.

  • You don’t need comfort, community, or a cause larger than the next horizon.
  • You need a vehicle, a clear threat, and enough fuel to outrun it — and you’re good at all three.
  • You are unsentimental enough to survive that world, and decent enough — just barely — to be something more than another raider.
  • In the wasteland, that distinction is everything.


Los Angeles, 2049

Blade Runner

You’d survive here because you know how to exist in moral grey areas without losing yourself completely.

  • You read people accurately, keep your circle petite, and ask the questions others prefer not to answer.
  • In a city where humanity is a legal designation rather than a feeling, you hold onto something that keeps you functional.
  • You’re not a hero. But you’re not lost, either.
  • In Blade Runner’s world, that distinction is everything.


Arrakis

Dune

Arrakis is the most hostile environment in the known universe — and you are precisely the kind of person it rewards.

  • Patience, discipline, and political awareness are your core strengths — and on Arrakis, they’re survival tools.
  • You understand that the long game matters more than any single victory.
  • Others come to Dune and are consumed by it. You’d learn its logic and earn its respect.
  • In time, you wouldn’t just survive Arrakis — you’d begin to reshape it.


A Galaxy Far, Far Away

Star Wars

The galaxy far, far away is extensive, noisy, and in a constant state of violent political upheaval — and you wouldn’t have it any other way.

  • You find meaning in being part of something larger than yourself — a cause, a crew, a rebellion.
  • You’d gravitate toward the Rebellion, or the fringes, or whatever pocket of the galaxy still believes the Empire’s grip can be broken.
  • You fight — not because you have to, but because standing aside isn’t something you’re capable of.
  • In Star Wars, that willingness is what makes all the difference.

8

‘Ghostbusters’ (2016)


Kate McKinnon smiles in her tactical gear in Ghostbusters 2016
Kate McKinnon smiles in her tactical gear in Ghostbusters 2016
Image via Sony

Ghostbusters lit a fire within Internet discourse in 2016 when online trolls rejected the idea of an all-female reboot of the 1984 classic from Ivan Reitman, but the unfortunate reality is that Paul Feig’s reimagining had very little to say. Despite the presence of four talented actresses in the cast, 2016’s Ghostbusters is virtually a beat-for-beat remake of the original film, only with more fart jokes, product placement, and terrible improv.

2016’s Ghostbusters looked ridiculously low-cost, as the film’s terrible CGI was nowhere near as effective as the practical makeup and effects that had been used in 1984. Worst of all, it tried to bring back original cast members Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd for pointless cameos that broke the canon of the series; while the most recent Ghostbusters sequels have been criticized for being too dour, they at least tried to do something modern.

7

‘Point Break’ (2015)


Bodhi (Edgar Ramirez) & Johnny Utah (Luke Bracey) sit on top of a mountain in Point Break (2015)
Image via Warner Bros. Pictures

Point Break is one of the most influential action films of the ‘90s, and struck a very unique tonal balance between irony and sincerity; ironically, it took a female director in Kathryn Bigelow to make one of the most profound action films ever that tackled the pressures of masculinity. The Point Break remake had none of this attention-to-detail, as it decided to revamp the fun world of surfing with a dull exploration of extreme sports, which already felt dated in 2015.

The biggest issue with the modern Point Break is the lack of chemistry between the two leads. The animated between Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze in the original was so mighty that Luke Bracey and Edgar Ramirez paled in comparison in the remake; Bracey and Ramirez are both good actors, but they were not given the opportunity to flesh out their roles.

6

‘Clash of the Titans’ (2010)


Liam Neeson as Zeus in Clash of the Titans.
Liam Neeson as Zeus in Clash of the Titans.
Image via Warner Bros.

Clash of the Titans is a remake that theoretically should have worked, as the original film from 1981 has not aged very well. However, the 2010 reimagining somehow managed to take the enormity of Greek mythology and make it dull, as the conflict between Zeus (Liam Neeson) and Perseus (Sam Worthington) felt uninspired.

Clash of the Titans immediately dated itself with terrible apply of 3D, which was created using a post-production conversion effect that didn’t feel fluid. This was a time in which studios were desperate to cash in on the success of Avatar, which had become the highest-grossing film of all-time, but Clash of the Titans didn’t have James Cameron’s attention-to-detail when it came to worldbuilding. Despite the fact that Greek mythology inspired much of state-of-the-art storytelling, it wasn’t until Christopher Nolan made The Odyssey that there was a genuinely great film about Greek myths.

5

‘The Lion King’ (2019)


Simba and Nala in the 2019 live-action The Lion King
Image via Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures

The Lion King is among the most cynical remakes ever made because it does absolutely nothing to distinguish itself from the 1994 classic, as it is virtually a shot-for-shot recreation. While Disney has shown that it can make good remakes like Pete’s Dragon that do something inventive and modern, The Lion King’s only additions are bad songs and morose visuals.

The Lion King can’t be described as “live-action” because there are no human characters, and the effect of seeing photorealistic animals talking and singing is downright creepy. It was the stylization and color within the 1994 classic that was critical to the storytelling, and the remake sucks out all of that energy with its attempt to have the same grounded realism of an episode of Animal Planet. Its success is among the most dispiriting box office stories of the 21st century.

4

‘Wuthering Heights’ (2026)


Margot Robbie dressed up in jewels as Cathy Earnshaw in Wuthering Heights.
Margot Robbie dressed up in jewels as Cathy Earnshaw in Wuthering Heights.
Image via © Warner Bros. /Courtesy Everett Collection

Wuthering Heights is a novel that has never been perfectly adapted, as even the Best Picture-nominated 1939 classic was only based on half of Emily Bronte’s novel. Instead of taking the opportunity to make a more thorough adaption, Emerald Fennell reduced the material even further by cutting out major characters and inserting more raunchiness; this is a complete misreading of the source material, as it is the unfulfilled longing between Catherine Earnshaw (Margot Robbie) and Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) that is supposed to heighten the sexual tension.

Fennell’s film casts actors who are far too ancient to realistically be playing their characters and uses shock value to visualize Catherine’s sexual awakening; the result is a film that feels made by someone who had only skimmed the novel and didn’t understand what it was actually trying to say about loss and love.

3

‘Going in Style’ (2017)


Mitzi (Siobhan Fallon Hogan) in Going in Style
Mitzi (Siobhan Fallon Hogan) in Going in Style
Image via Warner Bros

Going in Style had the potential to be a great remake because the original 1979 film is a classic, but also a product of its time that isn’t as well-remembered as some of the other comedies of its era. The casting of Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Alan Arkin was spot-on, but the issue with the modern Going in Style was its director, Zach Braff.

Braff didn’t have the same sensitivity and earnestness that had made Martin Brest’s take on the same story such a thoughtful exploration of aging and moving past one’s prime. The 2017 version is rife with slapstick gags and ridiculous heist movie shenanigans, as it basically revolves around most characters being idiots in order to be logical in the slightest. It’s a true shame that three all-time great actors couldn’t redeem this massively disappointing modern take.

2

‘Lilo and Stitch’ (2025)


Sydney Agudong as Nani and Maia Kealoha as Lilo, surfing while Stitch stands on the front of their board in Lilo & Stitch.
Sydney Agudong as Nani and Maia Kealoha as Lilo, surfing while Stitch stands on the front of their board in Lilo & Stitch.
Image via Disney

Lilo and Stitch is another completely cynical endevour from Disney becaue it catered to nostlagia without having anything modern to say about the beloved 2002 film. As is the case with most of Disney’s live-action versions of their animated classics, the Lilo & Stitch remake is devoid of color and filmmaking skill.

The film was originally planned to be a Disney+ release, and it’s obvious because of the low production values and impoverished acting; it feels like a made-for-television film, and frankly looks less cinematic than many of the shows that air on HBO today. It’s confusing why Disney decided to hire a modern imaginative team for the remake when the first film’s director, Chris Sanders, is still putting out great work; Sanders recently directed the Oscar-nominated animated masterpiece The Wild Robot, which is far more emotional and moving than the Lilo & Stitch remake.

1

‘The Mummy’ (2017)


The Mummy - 2017
Image via Universal Pictures

The Mummy is among the most embarrassing failures in contemporary Hollywood history because Universal tried to launch its own cinematic universe to rival Marvel with the “Dark Universe,” which was promptly cancelled after the first installment in the series failed. Rarely has a film been so blatantly made purely to set up sequels and spinoffs; there’s almost lore to the actual Egyptian mythology in The Mummy, as it is mostly focused on setting up characters like Dr. Henry Jekyll (played by Russell Crowe in a hilariously bad performance) who were planned to recur.

Tom Cruise gives one of the very few genuinely terrible performances of his entire career, even if he can’t be totally blamed for the film’s failings, given that there are few writer/directors working today who have had track records as disastrous as that of Alex Kurtzman.



01408504_poster_w780.jpg


The Mummy


Release Date

June 9, 2017

Runtime

110 minutes

Director

Alex Kurtzman

Writers

Christopher McQuarrie, David Koepp, Dylan Kussman