So all in all, there are three camps when it comes to remakes. The purests, who think the new should be a close carbon copy and hate all changes even if for the better. The "its just a movie " crowd AKA the ones with "lives", who think that changes should be made to rise above the original. The final camp being the middle ground, if its too close, what was the point, if its too different, why keep the name. I think I'm the third but I tend to be indecisive and contradictory, such is the pleasures on a Gemini with ADHD ;;;. There is technically the fourth, all remakes/sequels suck group, which is the extremist wing of the purests. Bottomline, if its profitable once, coat it with paint and a new wardrobe and send it around again. This is shown in remakes, sequels, DVDs, rip-offs and spin-offs. The Eva LA film will suck as an adaption and how Gunbuster will make it through a sequel I don't know. This cycle will never end, so we must learn to live with it.