Right now two high profile re-dos - Carrie and Oldboy - are screening in cinemas. Considering just how well the originals are regarded, it begs one simple question - why? One carries a recognisable name, the other is a critically lauded foreign-language cult film that has a limited audience.
In the end it may all boil down to making money, but that's still no excuse for some of the remakes that have been served up in recent memory. Digital Spy looks at 9 cinematic remakes that didn't need to happen below...
Fresh from the success of Good Will Hunting, Gus Van Sant took on Alfred Hitchcock for this shot-for-shot remake. The director assembled a stellar cast (although in hindsight Vince Vaughn sticks out like a sore thumb thanks to his subsequent comedy-heavy resume), but nobody came out of this in a positive light when measured next to the original.
The late, great Roger Ebert summed it up best when he said "genius apparently resides between or beneath the shots, or in chemistry that cannot be timed or counted".
The Vanishing (1993)
French filmmaker George Sluizer's stunning thriller The Vanishing - about a man's obsession to uncover the truth about what happened to his abducted girlfriend - put him firmly on the film industry radar in the late '80s. Sluizer was obviously dazzled by the bright lights and bleached teeth of Hollywood, as he remade the film with Jeff Bridges, Kiefer Sutherland and Sandra Bullock.
Gone was the building dread and haunting nature of the original in favour of cheap thrills and a severely botched ending. The Vanishing should be a lesson to any filmmaker wrestling with the idea of revisiting old ground.
Let Me In (2010)
Tomas Alfredson's thinking man's vampire film Let the Right One In is a genuine horror masterpiece. Its remake, in the writer's opinion, is a solidly enjoyable horror with a pair of good performances from Kodi Smit-McPhee and Chloë Grace Moretz.
It happened for the simple reason that it's easier to make money from a film if it isn't in a foreign language and doesn't have subtitles. Given the choice, we'd re-watch the 2008 original every time.
The Thing (2011)
Pitched as a prequel to John Carpenter's '80s classic (itself a remake of The Thing From Another World), this only ended up treading on the same turf as its illustrious predecessor. Has there been any director who's been remade more (and badly, we should add) than John Carpenter? Which brings us to...
Rob Zombie missed the point of Carpenter's boogeyman story completely by diving into the backstory of its rubber-masked killer. The greatest slasher movie of all time was reduced to a run-of-the-mill, excruciatingly awful horror that somehow warranted a sequel of its own.
The Omen (2006)
Richard Donner's original horror arrived hot on the heels of The Exorcist, but still registered as a compelling, edge-of-your-seat ride. Fast-forward 30 years and it was remade with barely a change to David Seltzer's script. The sole reason seemed to be to cash in on the June 6, 2006 release date - 6/6/06.
Funny Games (2007)
A decade after Michael Haneke's Austrian home invasion thriller, he returned to the same material. Naomi Watts led a star-studded Hollywood cast.
Even with a filmmaker as brilliant as Haneke steering the ship, this was shot-for-shot lined up next to the original and even re-used the same production blueprints. The Times went as far as calling this remake "art-house torture porn".
Total Recall (2012)
Paul Verhoeven's blistering sci-fi movie, which featured one of Arnold Schwarzenegger's most memorable screen performances, was rehashed by Len Wiseman into a functional action movie that lacked the wit and inventiveness of its predecessor.
A few of the original one-liners remained, but they only served to remind us how redundant this fresh Philip K Dick adaptation was.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
This much is true about The Amazing Spider-Man: Andrew Garfield is an excellent Peter Parker, Emma Stone is a great Gwen Stacy and the film itself is a well-made comic movie romp.
However, was there any point in rehashing Spidey's origin story only a decade after it was done (and done well) by Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire? 2002's Spider-Man is on regular rotation on TV, so it feels a tad unnecessary even under the guise of a 'reboot'. Couldn't Marc Webb and co just have focused on making a great Spider-Man film and spared us from another hero's journey story?
Which movie remakes do you think were redundant? Leave your comments below!