Dark Water US remake

[Bob The Cow]

Courtesy of 411mania.com

Jennifer Connelly is set to star in Deep Water, a remake of the 2002 Japanese thriller. Walter Salles will direct the new version.

The film revolves around a mother and a daughter who, after escaping from a custody battle with the girl's father, retreats to a rundown apartment. As they find out, however, they are not alone, as they are being haunted by a young girl who used to live there.

Credit: Variety

I myself have never seen Dark Water, but really want to see it, and will probably see the remake as well.

[Vertigo]

Thanks for the info Bob. And welcome....

[Alex Apple]

But thanks for the info, BTC, and welcome too!

[Bob The Cow]

It's old news, but I hear Kairo is being remade, as is Chaos. I heard a rumor somewhere that Wes Craven is a possible director for the Kairo remake (also old), and the Chaos remake will have DeNiro and Benicio Del Toro in it.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0328940/ The Chaos remake is already on IMDB, and is apparently due to be out next year.

again, it's all fairly old news, so you've probably heard it, but in case you haven't, there it is.

[drkne1]

Ergh, well I hope it does the original justice, but I really don't think that movie could be made any better.

I hope it's mostly just different like the American version of the Ring. I liked both versions, although I liked the Japanese version much much better.

[Bug-Eyed Earl]

The story at Scifi wire also mentioned that Nakata is about to make his English language debut with a movie called True Believers at MGM.

[ghevans]

some good news is that the remake for Kairo has fallen through - i cant remember where i read it but Craven is apparently disappointed that producers were left cold by the idea not being able to see its potential as a western horror.

the thing i dont get about all these remakes is - why bother when the originals are so good. if they like the film enough to buy the rights for them then just do the marketing to make the film popular in the states rather than remake the entire thing. surely marketing is more cost effective.

[Mandi Apple]

Originally Posted by ghevans

some good news is that the remake for Kairo has fallen through - i cant remember where i read it but Craven is apparently disappointed that producers were left cold by the idea not being able to see its potential as a western horror.

Yani mentioned it here, with a link to the original article. And I was pleased to hear it, too.

Don't get me wrong - I couldn't give a monkeys about Wes Craven, one way or the other, but as G said:

the thing i dont get about all these remakes is - why bother when the originals are so good. if they like the film enough to buy the rights for them then just do the marketing to make the film popular in the states rather than remake the entire thing. surely marketing is more cost effective.

Took the words right out of my mouth... but we've had the "Ooo I won't watch subtitled films" discussion about a gazillion times now, and I don't somehow think marketing is going to make a blind bit of difference. Most 13-year-olds (at whom these remakes do appear to be targeted, if the quality of our The Ring site mail is anything to go by) are not gonna watch a foreign film with subtitles, no matter how great the marketing/hype/hyperbole.

Having said that, however, I don't even know how Battle Royale got so popular with them, apart from the fact they're not supposed to see it and it's about teenage kids, in part... so maybe the right kind of marketing would bring in an audience of sorts... <shrugs> it just seems to me it's not only kids who say daft things about subs, it's adults too, and I think there'd be more resistance to it than you might necessarily imagine.

That said (again!) - if a remake genuinely can't improve on a masterpiece original, then IMHO there is no bloody point (other than a financial one) in botching up a mainstream remake...

But that's enough from me - thanks for the tip-off about Dark Water Bob, I hope you get to see the original ASAP 'cos IMHO it's a great movie

[asagaitomato]

oh dear

[Gizmola]

Yes there are many Asian language films being remade largely due to the ability of Roy Lee to secure rights and resell those to Hollywood. The Ring was a a success, and many films will follow now that Hollywood believes this formula for development works.

[Bob The Cow]

Most 13-year-olds (at whom these remakes do appear to be targeted, if the quality of our The Ring site mail is anything to go by) are not gonna watch a foreign film with subtitles, no matter how great the marketing/hype/hyperbole.

agreed. While when I was 13 I watched subbed movies I watched American movies a lot more, still do, but I won't shy away from subtitled movies is all), a lot of other people I knew wouldn't watch them, some still won't.

[asagaitomato]

Originally Posted by Bob The Cow

agreed. While when I was 13 I watched subbed movies I watched American movies a lot more, still do, but I won't shy away from subtitled movies is all), a lot of other people I knew wouldn't watch them, some still won't.

+1

it's a shame people won't just make the extra effort !

[Scuz]

Originally Posted by Bob The Cow

Most 13-year-olds (at whom these remakes do appear to be targeted, if the quality of our The Ring site mail is anything to go by) are not gonna watch a foreign film with subtitles, no matter how great the marketing/hype/hyperbole.

I pretty much haven't had a choice. As I live in Sweden all we get are subbed movies (mostly American though), and dubbed kids-movies...

[Judge Rage]

To be fair, I am not sure the The Ring was targeted at 13-year-olds.

I think Cody Banks: Secret Agent, The Lizzy McGuire Movie, those are movies for 13-year-olds.

The Ring's ad campaign was pretty clearly made for adults. The only reason it wasn't Rated R (in the U.S.) is because there is no nudity, no swearing, and not that much violence.

The reason that subtitled movies don't do well in the U.S. is not because American audiences won't go see them, it's because American distributors won't release them.

[Alex Apple]

Originally Posted by Judge Rage

To be fair, I am not sure the The Ring was targeted at 13-year-olds.

Judge: granted, here at the site we've only got anecdotal evidence. But by far and away the largest demographic for emails we receive about The Ring is in the teenage years, and the low ones. The other day we got one from an eleven year old. This is despite our warnings about "mature content" or whatever plastered on the way into the site.

The Ring's ad campaign was pretty clearly made for adults. The only reason it wasn't Rated R (in the U.S.) is because there is no nudity, no swearing, and not that much violence.

Can't really comment on that, as I've never seen the US ads. Here in the UK it was firmly targeted (or at least it seemed to be) at teenagers, as are most US horror releases. House of 1,000 Corpses is released cinematically over here today, and it's all over MTV tonight, at teatime.

The reason that subtitled movies don't do well in the U.S. is not because American audiences won't go see them, it's because American distributors won't release them.

I think it's a bit of both, to be honest: but, again, if you could see some of the mails that The Ring fans have sent us and their vehement dislike of subtitles (for example: why don't you remake Ringu in English? So we don't have to read and watch a movie at the same time) I think you may be persuaded otherwise!

[Judge Rage]

But by far and away the largest demographic for emails we receive about The Ring is in the teenage years, and the low ones.

I am surprised, actually. I would think The Ring would be a little too heady for young teens, especially with more "traditional" horror still being made (Cabin Fever / Freddy Vs. Jason)...maybe I underestimate our youth.

Here in the UK it was firmly targeted (or at least it seemed to be) at teenagers, as are most US horror releases. House of 1,000 Corpses is released cinematically over here today, and it's all over MTV tonight, at teatime.

Most horror is certainly targeted at teens here (like the two examples above), but The Ring seemed more heady in the ads, and the ads were on during E.R. and other more widely seen shows.

Quote:
The reason that subtitled movies don't do well in the U.S. is not because American audiences won't go see them, it's because American distributors won't release them.


I think it's a bit of both, to be honest: but, again, if you could see some of the mails that The Ring fans have sent us and their vehement dislike of subtitles (for example: why don't you remake Ringu in English? So we don't have to read and watch a movie at the same time) I think you may be persuaded otherwise!

Well I said that a little out of frustration. I know there are anti-subtitle thinkers out there, but in a defense of a lot of intelligent American people, we never really get a chance to see some of these great movies without waiting for video. Art house theaters do show quite a bit of international fare, but sometimes the movies sell out so quickly you can't get tickets! (Rare, but it happens). [/quote]

[scorchedblood]

You know.. I really don't know why everybody makes such a big deal over the whole remake issue. I mean... so what? The budget money doesn't come out of our pockets. A remake does NOT diminish (sp?) the original by any means (unless perhaps it just turns out to be a much better film). We aren't obligated to watch it. I just don't see any reason for all the groans and apparent distaste.

They can remake everything to hell and back for all I care. I'll either watch it or I won't. If it was a film I liked the first time around though, and the trailer for it looks interesting.. most likely I'll end up watching it.

[Judge Rage]

I really agree with you Scorched Blood.....

Wasn't The Godfather just a REMAKE of Mario Puzo's book? I really like The Ring remake because 1) It gives a different perspective on a great premise and 2) it made more Americans see the original....

[Mandi Apple]

Originally Posted by scorchedblood

A remake does NOT diminish (sp?) the original by any means (unless perhaps it just turns out to be a much better film). We aren't obligated to watch it. I just don't see any reason for all the groans and apparent distaste.

Damn right we're not obliged to watch it. But in an age where it seems that film backers are prepared to throw money at companies who just keep on churning out remakes of perfectly good movies instead of actually ploughing cash into new material, why shouldn't people get fed up with stuff being perpetually recycled, instead of something new and possibly innovatory being made?

I'm sorry, but I'm not happy with the situation as it stands. There are plenty of good film scriptwriters out there, I'm sure, who are not being given the chance to showcase new talent and new work simply because Hollywood wants to make big bucks off the backs of original Asian movies. Now it looks like they sell big time, considering the success story of The Ring, it's not gonna stop, either.

IMHO, it's a massive rip-off and doesn't improve on the originals in the main. If the new remakes can add something to the genre, all well and good. IMHO Judge was right: The Ring gave something new and reasonably intelligent to the market for the genre, and created some interest in the original, so hats off to Verbinski for treating the material with a modicum of respect.

But don't expect me to do anything but roll my eyes to heaven when I hear about proposed remakes of every other bloody Asian film that's been made since 1998, 'cos to me it's dull, it's old news and it's purely an exercise in flogging material back to mainstream Hollywood audiences because most of 'em won't countenance watching foreign movies...

[Judge Rage]

Some may argue there are no more original stories, but I think that is baloney. It is funny how those people "in the know" will reject great ideas like Memeno, but throw millions at garbage like Snow Dogs.

I wish the situation would change, but it has been this way for decades....great movies will be made and remade, and as long as they break even, it will never end.....