Either you make a sequel or a remake it is inevitable to compare it with the original. All too often a remake has nothing to do with the original except maybe the names of the characters involved.
Pretty much this is the case of Point Break (2015).
The "original" Point Break was a multilayer action movie. The romantic element was stronger, its purpose more clear, the fine line a deep undercover agent could cross and lose himself more evident and, because that matters the most in this cases, more fun.
In the "contemporary" version you are going to see some wild landscapes, including Angel Falls in Venezuela, Caineville in Utah and the Swiss Alps missing in the original. Yet the greenish over-sharped image, chosen by Ericson Core who serves both as the director and as cinematographer, dilutes their majestic natural appearance and makes them look artificial.
The movie also talks, in the beginning, about nirvana and spiritual enlightenment but in the end fails to emit such feelings towards the viewers.
So is it bad? Well no I wouldn't say that. it us a totally different beast. More raw, even more dramatic but with far less wit and charisma.
The cast isn't stellar. I wouldn't compare Ray Winstone with the ...shadow of the tongue-in-chic Pappas (Gary Busey) of the first installment. Neither Teresa Palmer is the smart-mouthed Lori Petty. All the characters are pretty much wooden and one dimensional.
Overall: I would say to check it out for the impressive stunts and landscapes, but the sharp and green cinematography ruined that for me. No real substance in the fun department or the performances either.
