Oscar nominated sequels and remakes

[MovieWes]

I'm pretty loose when it comes to genre definition, but a bit more strict when it comes to what qualifies as a sequel or remake.

In the first case, a sequel is distinctly tied to the original film, not just with the characters, but usually with the same personnel involved--actors, directors, writers, etc; plus, sequels usually come about because the first one was so successful. Neither of these apply, I would argue, to The Silence of the Lambs; none of the principle individuals carried over from Manhunter, and I'm not sure that the masses who went to see Silence were even aware of Manhunter.

In the case of remakes, to me a remake is only such an animal when they are remaking a previous film--the 1962 Mutiny on the Bounty, for example, or The Departed; but something like Marty or The Fugitive isn't so much a remake as an adaptation, in the same vein as adapting a play or a comic book.

I would describe Letters From Iwo Jima and The Lion in Winter not as sequels but rather as "companion" pieces to the earlier films.

The one thing that I would argue in reference The Silence of the Lambs being a sequel to Manhunter is the fact that the role of Hannibal Lecter in Silence was first offered to Brian Cox, who played "Lektor" in the first film. Ultimately, he turned it down because he "doesn't do sequels" (I guess he eventually broke his own role when he reprised his role from The Bourne Identity) and so they gave it to Gene Hackman instead. The film was then planned as a starring/directing vehicle for Hackman, but he eventually dropped out and Jonathan Demme and Anthony Hopkins jumped onboard.

Also, production began under the supervision of producer Dino DeLaurentiis, but he was so disappointed with the box-office of Manhunter that he gave up the sequel rights. Then, after Silence became such a hit, DeLaurentiis got the Lecter rights back and made Hannibal, Red Dragon (now officially considered both a remake of Manhunter and a prequel to Silence), and Young Hannibal. I've also noticed that the new "Hannibal Lecter Trilogy" DVD box set that was put out by MGM contains Manhunter, The Silence of the Lambs, and Hannibal. It conveniently excludes the awful Red Dragon from the canon.

I can see your point about Letters from Iwo Jima being a "companion" piece to Flags of Our Fathers considering that none of the characters cross over into both films (at least I think this is the case, but I have seen neither film, so I don't know). However, wouldn't The Lion in Winter be more of a sequel to Becket since the latter film continues the story of Peter O'Toole's King Henry II?

[Big Magilla]

I haven't seen the 1927 version of Chicago, but the cleaned up 1942 version, renamed Roxie Hart, and the Broadway musical, its revival and the film version of the musical are eons removed from Roxie Hart. Sara Allgood (matron Mrs. Morton) and Spring Byington (reporter Mary Sunshine) would turn over in their graves if they knew they were playing, respectively, a lesbian and a transvestite. Helene Reynolds, on the other hand, would probably have been delighted to have her relatively minor character of Velma Kelly elevated to co-lead.

[rain Bard]

As for A Man for All Seasons, I don't get that one at all.

I think the person who proposed it was thinking of a little-known Australian television production of the play done two years before the feature film. It's a pretty huge stretch, admittedly, especially since the makers of the Oscar-winning film probably hadn't even seen it.

On the other hand, I don't think it's wise to disqualify the 1962 Mutiny on the Bounty as a remake of the 1935 version, as both MGM films were based on the three-part 1932 novel Frank Lloyd had purchased the rights to, not simply the historical events that were the inspiration for the two early Australian Bounty films, or the 1984 film the Bounty, which was based on a different book. And not only that, but the makers of the 1962 version were very familiar with the 1935 version; any deviations could almost be seen as reactions to the earlier film.

Most of the films on the list I presented are either iffy or borderline remakes, it's true. But to pretend that the making of a film based on a play or book isn't at all inspired by the prior success of another film based on that play or book, seems like playing innocent to me.

Speaking of "playing innocent", has anyone who's seen all three film versions inspired by the play Chicago an opinion on how much the films influenced each other?

[Penelope]

rain Bard, of the titles you listed, the only ones I would consider remakes in the most casual sense of the term are: Hamlet, Around the World in 80 Days, Gigi, Ben-Hur, Tom Jones, LOTR, and The Departed. With the exception of The Departed, these titles all have something in common--they're all based on classic novels that had been previously filmed and--especially in the case of Hamlet--will probably be filmed every 5 years for eternity.

Mutiny on the Bounty is based on the Nordoff-Hall novel, and is thus not a remake of the earlier silent film; West Side Story, My Fair Lady, The Sound of Music, A Man for All Seasons, Oliver! and Chicago are based on plays, although the plays themselves come either from sources that had previously been filmed (Romeo & Juliet, Pygmalion, Oliver Twist) or based on films originally (Chicago/Roxie Hart); Marty, again, is based on a teleplay, and thus doesn't fit my criteria; and Titanic may basically be a narrative remake of History is Made at Night and a thematic/visual remake of The Wizard of Oz, but that's just influences more than anything else.

[Big Magilla]

The Departed is an intentional remake of Infernal Affairs and Marty as clearly a remake of a TV show as were Judgment at Nuremberg and The Hustler among others. The various versions of Mutiny on the Bounty were taken from the same source novel rather than any previous screen version so they are not technically remakes. Similary, The novel, The Silence of the Lambs may have been a sequel to the novel, Manhunter, but the film itself made by other artists was not.

The German Von Trapp Family Singers or whatever the U.S. name of teh German film was, was a more factual account of the life of Maria Von Trapp than the Rodgers & Hammerstein musical so I don't think it fits. As for A Man for All Seasons, I don't get that one at all. Yes, some of the real life characters were included in other historical dramas but in completely different contexts. Where does this stretching of the remake/sequel business end? I suppose we could call any film about Elizabeth I a sequel to any film about Henry VIII since he was her father.

[rain Bard]

Here is a recent discussion I recently contributed to, in which two lists were compiled: Best Picture winners that begot sequels, and Best Picture winners that were themselves remakes. I have to say, some of the titles floated in the latter category do not fit Penelope's strict definition of remake, but I might as well list them all and you can pare down from there:

Mutiny on the Bounty
Hamlet
Marty
Around the World in 80 Days
Gigi
Ben-Hur
West Side Story
Tom Jones
My Fair Lady
the Sound of Music
a Man For All Seasons
Oliver!
Titanic
Chicago
Lord of the Rings: the Return of the King
the Departed

[Penelope]

I'm pretty loose when it comes to genre definition, but a bit more strict when it comes to what qualifies as a sequel or remake.

In the first case, a sequel is distinctly tied to the original film, not just with the characters, but usually with the same personnel involved--actors, directors, writers, etc; plus, sequels usually come about because the first one was so successful. Neither of these apply, I would argue, to The Silence of the Lambs; none of the principle individuals carried over from Manhunter, and I'm not sure that the masses who went to see Silence were even aware of Manhunter.

In the case of remakes, to me a remake is only such an animal when they are remaking a previous film--the 1962 Mutiny on the Bounty, for example, or The Departed; but something like Marty or The Fugitive isn't so much a remake as an adaptation, in the same vein as adapting a play or a comic book.

I would describe Letters From Iwo Jima and The Lion in Winter not as sequels but rather as "companion" pieces to the earlier films.

[MovieWes]

I'm trying to compile a list of sequels and remakes that have been nominated for Best Picture. Is there anything I'm forgetting?

The sequels:

The Bells of St. Mary’s (sequel to Going My Way)
The Broadway Melody of 1936
The Godfather, Part II
The Godfather, Part III
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

The remakes:

Ben-Hur (remake of Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ)
The Departed (remake of Infernal Affairs)
The Fugitive (adaptation of TV series)
Marty (remake of TV movie)
Mutiny on the Bounty (1935, 1962)
Traffic (remake of TV miniseries)

Do they count as sequels?

Letters from Iwo Jima (sequel to Flags of Our Fathers)
The Lion in Winter (sequel to Becket)
The Silence of the Lambs (sequel to Manhunter)