2. "Does that movie really need a remake?" In response to Reply # 0
Some movies I can see why a remake is made (e.g. improvement on dated special effects) but Cliffhanger doesn't feel like the type of movie that HAS to be remade. It's not like the flick has a unique concept. They could literally make a movie with a dude who is regretful about not being able to save a life and then runs into some crooks trying to pull a heist. All they would have to do is switch some things around such as the protagonist's profession and voila, a different movie altogether.
werner "who is abel ferrara?" herzog shot the script for bad lieutenant: port of call new orleans (which i really enjoyed) not considering it a remake of (or sequel to) bad lieutenant, but because of character similarities and marketing potential "bad lieutenant" was tacked onto the title despite protests from ferrara. when i first saw this post i thought remaking cliffhanger was such a shitty, lazy idea emblematic of exactly what i don't like about hollywood studios in recent years,* but maybe it's just a new but similar story or a marketing move calling it a remake.
12. "I mean, we're talking about it so yeah." In response to Reply # 10
We probably wouldn't be talking about random mountain climbing movie. Remakes like this raise awareness which makes studios happy. People will notice a Cliffhanger remake or Denzel in The Equalizer more than just a new film.
15. "Any recognition is good recognition." In response to Reply # 14
I personally favor the rip-off over the remake but studios go for any name recognition they can get. I'm not saying it's right but an exec would just see that a post was made about it and feel like their decision was valid.