Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
Original beats the remake, but the 91 version is still decent.
99% of the time, the original is better than the re-make. In this case, even though that it true, both movies are incredible. The key pieces in the re-make that allow it to be so close is the directing of Martin Scorsese and the acting of Robert DeNiro. Not only did Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum play cameo roles in the re-make but the entire picture felt like an ode to the original. Both can stand alone as great thrillers. Ultimately, the original still wins out in this comparison.
Both are great, they have their similarities and their differences, it all comes down to preference. This is a rare case where I prefer the remake. As much as I liked the original, I really admired some of Scorsese's choices in the remake, like making Sam Bowden a flawed man who cheats on his wife. 1991 version for me.
love the remake but the original was ahead of its time with Mitchum and Peck at their best.
The remake was fine, but really nothing special! I've only seen it once so I'm not sure whether I generally feel like that or I was just underwhelmed since I was in a middle of a Scorsese marathon when I watched it! It felt too Hollywood-ise despite the good direction and acting. The original is certainly better! Better acting, better directing, love the film noir feel to it and it's more intensed! And Sam doesn't necessarily need to be a flawed man. The only area where the remake improved was DeNiro's performance! 1962 CF>1991 CF!