I agree that in general, remakes are usually a bad idea. They're often done just to make more money out of the successful original with a lower budget.
I never saw the shot-for-shot colour remake of Psycho. I heard it was bad.
I guess we can both cite examples of both good and bad re-makes, re-imaginings, re-boots and sequels. It just depends on how well executed they are.
When a new version sticks too closely to the original, as in the Psycho remake or how a a remake in the style of 1960s' TV of a Doctor Who serial would be, there's no creative point to it. Fans of the original say things like "it fails to capture the atmosphere of the original" and it won't attract new audiences because it's in an old fashioned style. In any case, no remake can re-capture the impact on the audience of seeing something new for the first time - when it was a new idea and seemed to have originality.
When a new version changes things around (even if it's really just an update to the current style of TV) some fans of the original will always struggle to accept it - like the 2005 reboot of Doctor Who itself.
I think re-making the missing stories is a special case. They could be re-worked in the current TV style with the current Doctor. Like they did with Family of Blood from the original book.
I think though missing in a completely different sense, Shada would be a good example of what you say. I have only listened to the first 15 minutes or so of the Paul McGann version and though he's good in it, it lacks the a little of the original purely due to the absence of Tom Baker's Doctor. It was made for the Fourth Doctor and from what I heard it made little adjustment for the Eighth.
Now another small example of your point which I would like to point out is a small reworking of some Power Of The Daleks which cropped up in Victory Of The Daleks It was the whole 'I am your soldier,' thing which is a straight copy of the 'I am your servant,' quotes from the former story. As a new who viewer with no knowledge of the story, it's a great line but when you know where it's being nicked from, it doesn't feel the same and it just feels a rotten rip off.
IMO the biggest rip off of a classic who story in New Who is Voyage Of The Damned shamelessly plundering ideas from The Robots Of Death. The whole robots turning bad thing and a controller of sorts behind the scenes, it just seemed like a poor remake of The Robots Of Death with extra ideas.
So for me, I think the show should always move on with new ideas. It shouldn't go plundering stories 40-50 years ago for remakes. It's like comparing two successive Doctors who act exactly the same, the second one will always compare unfavorably with the first.
Comments
I think though missing in a completely different sense, Shada would be a good example of what you say. I have only listened to the first 15 minutes or so of the Paul McGann version and though he's good in it, it lacks the a little of the original purely due to the absence of Tom Baker's Doctor. It was made for the Fourth Doctor and from what I heard it made little adjustment for the Eighth.
Now another small example of your point which I would like to point out is a small reworking of some Power Of The Daleks which cropped up in Victory Of The Daleks It was the whole 'I am your soldier,' thing which is a straight copy of the 'I am your servant,' quotes from the former story. As a new who viewer with no knowledge of the story, it's a great line but when you know where it's being nicked from, it doesn't feel the same and it just feels a rotten rip off.
IMO the biggest rip off of a classic who story in New Who is Voyage Of The Damned shamelessly plundering ideas from The Robots Of Death. The whole robots turning bad thing and a controller of sorts behind the scenes, it just seemed like a poor remake of The Robots Of Death with extra ideas.
So for me, I think the show should always move on with new ideas. It shouldn't go plundering stories 40-50 years ago for remakes. It's like comparing two successive Doctors who act exactly the same, the second one will always compare unfavorably with the first.