Reboot, Reboot, and Reboot? (films, Hollywood, action, adventure)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why are writers, producers, directors, etc. Just rebooting everything? Why not continue something if it already had a first chapter why go and re-boot it all over again for? Why is this happening to everything?
Generally, because the last film or films in the series wrecked the franchise. It's why we call them "reboots." If your system crashes, you turn it off and start over.
Cases in point:
Raimi's Spidey films. First one was okay. Second one was fantastic. Third one was horrible. The fourth one that they began was even worse than the third. But Spidey is Marvel's A#1 character, so they cleaned the slate and started over.
Star Trek. The original cast members are either no longer with us or far too old to be plausible adventurers. The last couple of NextGen films were almost SyFy Channel quality bad. Patrick Stewart was no longer interested in the role. The last Trek TV foray didn't do so well. So again, the studio thought they'd try a reboot. It worked.
Frankly I'm just tired of movies that are unoriginal...reboots or remakes...it's all the same. Same as making movies of old TV shows....there just doesn't seem to be any creativity left in Hollywood anymore.
I'm probably alone, but I don't mind the Spidey reboot so much. It's interesting to see what two different directors do with the same character in such a short span of time with similar technology at their disposal.
I'm probably alone, but I don't mind the Spidey reboot so much. It's interesting to see what two different directors do with the same character in such a short span of time with similar technology at their disposal.
I liked the Spidey reboot. Didn't love it, but it was okay. But I wasn't a huge fan of the Raimi films. Spidey 2 was really good. But Spidey 1 was just meh, and Spidey 3 was horrible.
Reboots are nothing more than a way to get more bang for you buck. They don't have to pay for writers, don't have to take chances and come up with fresh ideas on their own, and they are bound to at least break even just on the name brand alone. Hollywood productions are about profit, filmmaking is a business, and if they can make a profit by investing as little as possible into the final product they will. Hence all of the remakes, sequals, prequals, etc.
While, yes, you are right in that money is a motivation for making reboots, you could say the same thing about filmmakers and screenwriters who make numerous sequels for films when they are not needed or when they contribute nothing to the original. Besides, reboots CAN work, and some of them have actually been very good in revitalizing their respective franchises. Let's look at a couple successful reboots:
Casino Royale: The James Bond franchise has been around for a very long time, and while the series has had its fair share of hits and misses, the misses started to pile on at the end of the Pierce Brosnan era. Die Another Day was HORRIBLE; the plot made no sense, the dialogue was painful, and the over-reliance on CGI and Q's gadgets was laughable. For a film that was designed to celebrate Bond's 40 anniversary, and one that was attended by THE QUEEN, it was a huge disappointment. Casino Royale was a solid and even necessary reboot because they corrected everything that was wrong with Die Another Day. They stripped it down into a character-driven origin story, where Bond is inexperienced and vulnerable. Also, they got rid of all the silly gadgets that were a prominent part of the series in the past. While special effects in movies are nice for eye candy, I find that many filmmakers use them as a crutch when they don't have a solid plot, good acting or developed characters.
Batman Begins: Like Casino Royale, Batman Begins was preceded by a TERRIBLE movie; a movie that was so bad it almost completely killed not just the Batman franchise but the idea of making comic book movies. Batman and Robin was bad because it basically destroyed everything that defined Batman and that particular universe. The dialogue was awful (though I admit to having a guilty pleasure from Mr. Freeze's puns,) the story was stupid, the sets were laughably unfeasible (the observatory being held by a HUGE statue,) bat-nipples and I wanted to punch Robin in the face repeatedly. Batman Begins worked as well as it did because it too was a very character-driven movie. It was dark, gritty and for a superhero movie, pretty realistic and plausible. Granted, not every movie should use that dark and somber approach (looking at you, Man of Steel,) but it works for Batman because, well, that was the foundation behind Batman's origin and universe. And the nice thing about this reboot? It was followed up by a VERY good movie, and probably the best superhero movie yet.
Star Trek: I am a Trekkie, and I love the original series with a passion, (though my favorite Star Trek series is Deep Space Nine, and that's something I will debate without end) but even I admit that it is a dated series. The Next Generation movies, with the sole exception being First Contact, were terrible, and even being a fan of TNG as well, I can't stomach Generations, Insurrection and especially Nemesis. With the awful "Enterprise" series that followed those movies, the franchise was on life-support. I thought Abrams did an amazing job with rebooting Star Trek, and both that movie and Into Darkness were very solid films that I thought were marketed well to both Trekkies and people who wouldn't know the difference between a Romulan and a Klingon. I hear the criticisms about the movies being more action-based instead of focusing on exploration as is the mission of the Enterprise, but exploration is something that would be better suited for a television series as opposed to a movie. Remember, the best Star Trek movie, Wrath of Khan, had little exploration, focusing instead on the conflict between Khan and Kirk.
Reboots can work if given the right parameters and if approached the correct way. The past three examples are reboot that worked because not only were their respective series either dated or taken horribly off-course, they were approached properly. I posted earlier about Legendary Pictures rebooting Godzilla, and I believe that it's a movie that is desperately needed and, if approached properly, can work.
Reboots don't really save any money on the front end. Studios still have to hire all the same people to make a reboot that they do to make a film from scratch. It's no cheaper. And if the property is owned by someone else, it can even be more expensive, since the studio has to purchase rights for the film.
But reboots, remakes, etc. do stand a better chance of making money upon release, simply because there's already an audience out there familiar with the concept. It's true to a large degree in the U.S., but it's gangbusters true overseas, where sequels and "franchise" films make way more money than they do in the U.S. With domestic ticket sales falling more and more every year, studios are catering more and more to the foreign market.
To me, it's all about the quality. I don't care if it's a seuqel, reboot, re-do, rehash, tie-in, or spin-off. If it's a good movie, I want to see it. If it's not, I don't. I'd rather watch a good reboot than a bad original film.
There are dozens and dozens of GREAT movies and TV shows that are remakes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
