The Remake of The Little Shop of Horrors is Better Than the Original

When it comes to musical comedies, few films are as beloved as "Little Shop of Horrors." The story of a hapless florist who raises a bloodthirsty plant has been adapted numerous times throughout the years, but perhaps none are as well-known as the 1986 remake of the original 1960 film. While the original may have been a cult classic, there are several reasons why the 1986 version is ultimately a superior film.

First and foremost, the 1986 "Little Shop of Horrors" boasts a more polished production. The original was a low-budget affair shot in just two days, with minimal sets and a cast of mostly unknown actors. While the film has its charms, it's undeniably rough around the edges. In contrast, the 1986 version is a more refined work, with elaborate set design, intricate puppetry, and more elaborate musical numbers.

Another factor that sets the 1986 "Little Shop of Horrors" apart from the original is its all-star cast. While the 1960 film featured a cast of unknowns, the remake boasts a lineup of Hollywood heavyweights. From Rick Moranis' endearing portrayal of Seymour to Steve Martin's scene-stealing turn as the sadistic dentist, the film is packed with memorable performances. Ellen Greene's pitch-perfect rendition of "Somewhere That's Green" is particularly noteworthy, as is Levi Stubbs' iconic voice work as the bloodthirsty plant Audrey II.

In addition to its superior production values and acting, the 1986 "Little Shop of Horrors" also benefits from a more faithful adaptation of the source material. While the original film was a straightforward horror-comedy, the remake stays truer to the musical stage production that inspired it. The songs are catchier, the characters more fleshed-out, and the plot more engaging overall. The film's darker ending, which diverges from the original's happy conclusion, also adds a layer of depth and poignancy to the story.

Of course, one could argue that the 1960 "Little Shop of Horrors" should be given credit for pioneering the comedy-horror genre on film. After all, it was one of the earliest examples of a horror-comedy that combined thrills and laughs in equal measure. However, while the original may have been a trailblazer, it ultimately fails to hold up against the 1986 remake. The latter film takes the foundation laid by the original and builds upon it, creating a more engaging, polished, and ultimately memorable musical comedy classic.

In conclusion, while the original "Little Shop of Horrors" may have been a cult classic, it is the 1986 remake that has truly stood the test of time. With its superior production values, all-star cast, and faithful adaptation of the stage musical, the later film is a superior work that continues to delight audiences nearly four decades after its release.