Suspiria, as many know, is without a doubt my favorite movie and I have been hearing rumors of its remake for quite a while now. The fact that it is being remade though is neither here nor there. I really couldn't care less, if it brings the original to a wider audience then that is fantastic. If it doesn't it still won't change my feelings towards Argento's masterpiece. What does piss me off though it that I recently read that David Gordon Green, who is directing the remake, has stated that he plans to use Goblin's original score in his version of the movie. Granted he has also stated that he plans to change it up slightly but my point is this. Why remake a movie if you plan on using elements from the original? Surely the point of a remake is to bring your vision of the story to life?
I find this to be lazy on behalf of the filmmaker. Give the story your twist, hire someone to write a new score, bring your movie to life however you see fit, but make it your movie. The same happened with Rob Zombie's remake of Halloween. Now, I personally enjoyed this remake, I especially enjoyed Michael's backstory as a child. But, Zombie also decided to use John Carpenter's original score. Why? Sure, Tyler Bates score sounded good but all it did was remind us the viewer that we were watching a remake.
These filmmakers want us to believe that they have this wonderful vision of what they can do with these stories. Fine, wonderful, slap yourself on the back for not having original material, but come on guys, using the original score? Why not go the Gus Van Sant route and just remake it shot for shot? Make your fucking remake if you so desire but don't try and suck fans of the originals in by knowing that the scores of movies such as Suspiria and Halloween are as much an integral part of the films as the plot or characters. They are in fact characters all of their own, so why not write your own characters in?
You could argue that John Carpenter used the same title sequence in his vision of The Thing. Well, yes he did, but the difference being is that The Thing and The Thing From Another World were both interpretations of the John W. Campbell book Who Goes There? Carpenter also made an entirely different movie regardless of whether you see it as a remake or not, which it isn't.
Remakes will continue to be a source of debate of that I am sure. If they are to be made though at least have the courage to make your own film, don't ride on the coattails of the source material any more than you already are. Like I said, it is lazy and it is also a further insult to the fans you are no doubt trying to win over.