Our philosophy about rating could be summarized by the following question:
How much fun would it be for a modern viewer to watch this movie now?
This means that old movies that may have been cult fifty years ago but that are rather boring now will not necessarily have a good rating. This also means that low budget films are rated on the same scale than high budget ones…meaning on how entertaining they truly are for the average viewer.
For remakes, the question is tricky: should the lack of novelty be reflected in the rating? Well, you can watch a remake without having seen the original. So, following the rating philosophy cited above, I would say no!
In this website, if the remake is more fun to watch for a modern viewer than the original, this will be reflected in the rating (e.g. The Hills Have Eyes’ remake has a better rate than the Wes Craven’s original). However, we try to take into account whether the authors of the remake have tried to add something to the original movie, or if they simply made the exact copy with recent special effect just to make some money (e.g. The Omen 2006 has a worst rating than the 1976’s one, despite being almost the same movies).
Logically, we will always consider that someone has seen the initial movie(s) before watching a sequel. Therefore, if the innovative aspect and novelty of the movie are gone, we will take it into account (e.g. Paranormal Activity 1 has a good rating but Paranormal Activity 2 has a bad one, despite being rather similar movies).