Bring on the Remakes and Sequels…
In looking ahead at the films being released in theaters this year, I am once again astounded by the number of remakes, sequels, adaptations, and franchise spin-offs that will grace the silver screen. Films like Emma (February 2020), Mulan (March 2020), Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (April 2020), No Time to Die (April 2020), Fast & Furious 9 (May 2020), Ghostbusters: Afterlife (July 2020), Bill & Ted Face the Music (August 2020), Halloween Kills (October 2020), and West Side Story (December 2020) are just some of the many films that are being released this year that fall into this trendy ‘category’ of filmmaking. This trend, however, is by no means a recent phenomenon, as many critics would like you to believe. Rather, it is a holdover from the early days of the Hollywood Studio System, but done in such a way as to be far more apparent and less surreptitious than in those earlier days.
Given that Hollywood used to be such a small community (and still is in a way), studio executives went out of their way to find source material for their films and bought up the rights to many classic, and contemporary, novels, and short stories, to attract audiences to the theaters. The same practices are still being used today to fill theater seats and keep revenues steady, as it is less of a gamble to adapt a popular novel (or successful screenplay) than to take a risk on an entirely new or original screenplay. Books such as The Maltese Falcon (Dashiell Hammett 1930) and The Hunger Games (Suzanne Collins 2008) are great examples of novels that had successful runs in publishing and were swiftly turned into film adaptations. ‘The Maltese Falcon’ was turned into a 1931 pre-Code film (The Maltese Falcon), a 1936 comedic adaptation (under the title Satan Met a Lady), and the Academy Award Nominated 1941 film (The Maltese Falcon) starring Humphrey Bogart (among others). ‘The Hunger Games’ has become a popular film franchise (starting in 2012 with the release of the first, The Hunger Games, movie), making millions of dollars at the box office, and spawning three film sequels (released from 2013-2015) based upon Collins’ wildly popular book trilogy.
Listed below are just some of the many films that have been remade and adapted during the height of the Hollywood Studio system, often featuring release dates within years of each other. All of these films boast different titles (as if the studios thought they were getting away with something sneaky; duping their audiences into believing that they were seeing an entirely ‘different’ film), but feature the same storyline, and sometimes even the same director and/or actors. Some of the remakes and sequels are downright awful, some are merely amusing, and others prove to be just as good as the original film, if not even better… Enjoy!
Rafter Romance (dir. William A. Seiter 1933) and Living on Love (dir. Lew Landers 1937)
Both RKO films revolve around the premise of two single people, living in New York City, who don’t know that they are the other ‘occupant’ renting a single room in an apartment building (split evenly via 12-hour shifts). Obviously, both movies are romantic comedies, with the original film, Rafter Romance, featuring a young Ginger Rogers in the leading role of Mary Carrol, opposite Norman Foster as Jack Bacon, an aspiring artists who is the original occupant of the attic the two unknowingly co-habitat. The remake, Living on Love, moves the action from the attic to the basement, and recasts the leads with Whitney Bourne and James Dunn, but does not retain some of the innuendo and suggestiveness that makes the pre-Code, Rafter Romance, the superior film of the two.
One Man’s Journey (dir. John S. Robertson 1933) and A Man to Remember (dir. Garson Kanin 1938)
Lionel Barrymore stars as Dr. Eli Watt, a country physician who puts everyone else’s needs before his own in One Man’s Journey, an RKO pre-Code drama. This film was remade as A Man to Remember, with Edward Ellis in the lead role as Dr. John Abbott, but what makes the remake just as compelling (if not the better film) is that the screenplay was adapted by Dalton Trumbo, who tightened up the script, ramped up the drama, and created a more poignant ending than the original film.
Libeled Lady (dir. Jack Conway 1936) and Easy to Wed (dir. Edward Buzzell 1946)
Why wouldn’t you take an Academy Award nominated, black and white, screwball comedy and remake it as a Technicolor musical comedy film? That’s exactly what MGM did with Libeled Lady and Easy to Wed. The original film was a vehicle for stars Myrna Loy and William Powell, and features a delightful ensemble cast that also includes Spencer Tracy and Jean Harlow. The remake becomes a vehicle for Van Johnson and Esther Williams, with a rounded-out cast including Lucille Ball and Kennan Wynn. The films are nearly identical with slight changes in location and minor gags. An epic fishing scene, starring William Powell in Libeled Lady, is replaced in the remake with an ill-fated duck hunting scene featuring Van Johnson in Easy to Wed. Both films provide a few laughs, but Libeled Lady (unsurprisingly) is the more enjoyable film.
Bachelor Mother (dir. Garson Kanin 1939) and Bundle of Joy (dir. Norman Taurog 1956)
The only thing a single woman wants for Christmas is a baby, right? Well, that is what Bachelor Mother would have you believe. When Ginger Rogers, as Polly Parrish, is mistaken for the mother of an orphaned baby, her boss, David Merlin (David Niven), is all too happy to ‘reunite’ Polly with her abandoned baby, with the caveat that if Polly wants to keep her job, she must also keep the baby… Add a few musical numbers, and you have the 1956 Technicolor remake, Bundle of Joy, starring Eddie Fisher and Debbie Reynolds, as Dan Merlin and Polly Parrish (respectively). The remake is okay, but I’ll stick with the classic pairing of Rogers and Niven, and a scene stealing ‘Donald Duck’ toy.
Ball of Fire (dir. Howard Hawks 1941) and A Song is Born (dir. Howards Hawks 1948)
Adapted from a story, “From A to Z,” by Billy Wilder and Thomas Monroe, these two films once again show the studios’ attempts to recycle successful storylines with only slight alterations. Here RKO took a delightful (black & white) screwball comedy, starring Barbara Stanwyck and Gary Cooper, and turned it into a Technicolor musical starring Danny Kaye and Virginia Mayo, and even had Howard Hawks direct both films. In Ball of Fire, Cooper plays grammarian Professor Bertram Potts, who is researching modern slang for an encyclopedia, and enlists the help of nightclub performer “Sugarpuss” O’Shea (Stanwyck) to help school him in the vocabulary that he is missing. In A Song is Born, Professor Hobart Frisbee (Kaye) is working on a musical encyclopedia and enlists the help of nightclub singer Honey Swanson (Mayo) to teach him about jazz, and other popular music. The films are nearly identical, including aspects of the set, and Howard Hawks’ signature screwball directing style, but, for me, the Cooper/Stanwyck pairing makes for the more interesting, and captivating, screwball couple.
Rio Bravo (dir. Howard Hawks 1959), El Dorado (dir. Howard Hawks 1967), and Rio Lobo (dir. Howard Hawks 1970)
Howard Hawks strikes again, this time with a trio of westerns that feature slight variations of the same plot, and even the same actors. This time, with the crumbling of the studio system, the films were made by different production companies. All three films star John Wayne as a lawman-type-figure who becomes engrossed in some form of local criminal standoff, and must enlist the help of several ‘buddies’ to save the day. The first film, Rio Bravo, pairs Wayne with Dean Martin and Ricky Nelson; the second, El Dorado, features Wayne with Robert Mitchum and James Caan; the third, Rio Lobo, features Wayne with Jorge Rivero and Christopher Mitchum (Robert Mitchum’s son). It is as if Hawks, with these three films (as with his previous remakes, including the loose screwball cycle, or homages, that can be seen via Bringing Up Baby [1938], Monkey Business [1952], and Man’s Favorite Sport? [1964]) attempts to outdo himself, film after film. There is a sense, in watching these films, that Hawks kept trying to refine the same scenes, tropes, and themes, but was never quite satisfied with his handiwork, which, for me, cements Hawks as a filmmaking auteur (much like Alfred Hitchcock, and his own remaking of The Man Who Knew Too Much [1934] with The Man Who Knew Too Much [1956]), a true artist and author who was constantly looking to improve his craft.
It is undeniable that film remakes, sequels, and adaptations are here to stay. What are your favorite film remakes and sequels? Which page to screen adaptations do you enjoy the most? What are your thoughts on this ‘trend’ in filmmaking? Share your reactions in the comments below, and don’t forget to book your tickets to see Dolittle (2020) in the theaters before our discussion of all things ‘Doctor Dolittle’ next week!
Copyright © 2020 Sarah Crane
