I almost wonder if the bile some people have for remakes might be partially due to the often extraneous implications of the term. When you remake a house, you tear the thing down to build a new thing in its place. That’s not really the case for artistic remakes. Those are closer in spirit to building a similar structure across the street. Or an architectural revival. It's not ever as though any bricks are being stolen. They could just share a constitution. The painters may have even taken a look at the inspiration's swatches.
To me, remakes often just seem like broad adaptations that happen to use the same medium. And I tend towards a general acceptance of that breadth in adaptations of any kind. The source is there for what it is, leaving all kinds of room for interpretation in its spirit.
I think that an ideal remake is the new house across the street that's haunted by some of the old one's ghosts.
Last movie you saw? The new "Poltergeist". But I only remembered that after I finished this whole thing about remakes and haunted houses.