Ben Spacek: Not only are most horror remakes utterly unnecessary, but when was the last time one was any good? I told myself I would stop watching them, but then I broke down to see The Wicker Man because I'm fan of the director (Neil LaBute), as well as the original. Of course, I was disappointed. It's depressing that talented and original directors like LaBute, Richard Linklater and Tim Burton resort to remakes. Now that Hollywood has done a remake of seemingly every classic horror film, it is turning to obscure ones for source material. Do you think that people who see The Wicker Man or Black Christmas even know that they're remakes?
Matthew Scott Hunter: I confess I didn't know The Wicker Man was a remake, and that's why I have mixed feelings on remakes. If I like The Wicker Man, I'll seek out the original, which would have otherwise eluded me. However, if it's awful, I'll likely never bother with the 1973 version. I shudder to think how many people will never see the original The Fog for the same reason. But it's a crapshoot. I never would've seen Ringu had I not enjoyed Gore Verbinski's American remake. But I still haven't seen Ringu 2 because I hated its remake.
BS: Well, you should see the original Wicker Man; at the very least, it will expand your concept of what a horror movie can be. Try to avoid the 88-minute U.S. version while you're at it. Unlike many recent horror remakes, I believe the director's intentions were good, but he glosses over the subtexts (religious, sexual and otherwise) that made the original so disturbingly creepy. As much of a fan of John Carpenter as I am, I actually thought a remake of The Fog wasn't a bad idea, because unlike Psycho and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, there was room for improvement. But Hollywood isn't interested in fixing stories, just cannibalizing them. The fact that they remade a film called The Fog is a fitting metaphor.
MSH: I thought 1951's The Thing was perfect, but now I prefer John Carpenter's wildly different 1982 version. I think there could be an impressive reimagining of Psycho, but Gus Van Sant's remake is a pointless shot-for-shot imitation. In a genre famous for nostalgic fanboy directors, the cannibalization of ideas is inevitable, remake or otherwise. How often do you see an original horror film nowadays that's truly original?