Debate and Discussion

So many film reboots, so little time... Thoughts?
itsjustaar at 10:32PM, March 23, 2011
(online)
posts: 409
joined: 12-2-2010
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2011/mar/18/film-reboots-which-to-choose

This blog kinda got me thinking…

What's your opinion on film ‘reboots’? Remakes? Should a film really need to be changed or updated for an audience of the now, or should it be left alone through the passage of time? Should a series need to start over because the previous versions just didn't seem to click the first time? I know it's a Hollywood thing, and it's probably all about making in a profit for them, but what do you think? Not so much from the casual viewer's standpoint as opposed to a fan of what property they intend to be doing it on.

I've heard for awhile that the new Superman film was once again going to be returning to ‘his roots.’ The first thing that kinda came into mind was, “Didn't we already see that?” I mean, certainly a good portion of people probably went in to see what that Smallville television show was all about. Even if they didn't, then certainly most would probably already know the gist about his past; alien comes to Earth, alien isn't used to his powers, alien overcomes this, and then dons the suit to take on mad scientist/businessman Luthor and a bunch of other aliens.

I don't know. I am a little iffy on the concept of the reboot. I can probably see it as a means of redoing what might have seemed as dated at the time - like if they attempted to go back and start over with the ‘Die Hard’ film. One could say ‘Die Hard 4.0/Live Free or Die Hard’ could be considered a reboot of the franchise, considering it deals the more technical side of things that the previous films addressed.

There has been talk about a ‘Secret of NIMH’ reboot of the sort, but I don't know the progress on how this would turn out to be. A CGI-based film, which may or may not have followed the book to the bone. As the film only spawned one sequel that many regard as pretty inferior, I would sorta hope this does get done - even if many regard the original Bluth film as a classic - because I'm curious how the ensuing books that followed Mrs. Frisby would turn out to be.

So what are your thoughts? Like ‘em? Hate ’em? Anything you want to see?

Personally, I would like a ‘Cool World’ reboot. Now and again we might see an animated film, but an animated horror film, which was originally intended, is something you don't see often. The original had it's okay points, but to open up a new niche, with a bit of a ‘Felidae’ kinda quality, would be very fun to see. Might be bad for business, and the parents taking their kids in would probably throw a fit over it, but shoot - it's ‘different.’ xD
“Keeping Up with Thursday” - Updated Every 3 Days!
“ZombieToons Must Die” - hiatus. D:
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
isukun at 12:22AM, March 24, 2011
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I'm getting sick of them, myself. On the plus side, though, the Dune reboot got cancelled.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
bnortondavies at 4:56AM, March 24, 2011
(online)
posts: 19
joined: 9-19-2010
I believe a remake has it's place… usually in the bargain bin 6 months after it's release.

The problem is, as you said, Hollywood is all about profit, therefore the notion of giving a reboot the green light is usually an excuse to cash in on a known products name and legacy rather than it's content which is why they get it plain wrong.

Horror remakes such as House of Wax, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and the lamentable Nightmare on Elm Street ignore the inventiveness of the originals and replace it with formulaic shocks and scares. British classics such as The Italian Job and The Wicker Man get stripped of wit and charm and packaged as vehicles for mediocre stars. Children's classics get reinvented for the ADHD generation and lose tight plotting and magic in favour of cheap gags and CGI.

As I sit here now I admit I am struggling to think of one remake that is better than the original… The closest I can get is something like Ocean's Eleven but even then if you gave it a different name you would never know it was based on the earlier film, the differences being so great.

But then this suggests I would rather see shot for shot updates of films which I most certainly don't- Pscho proved that that doesn't work, and the awful American versions of The Ring and The Grudge certainly lost something in the translation for all they looked the part.

Ultimately I think the studios should be more willing to embrace new material and have faith that if a product is good the audience will find it rather than putting all of their hope in a good opening weekend on the strength of a name before bad word of mouth kills it.

last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
Aurora Moon at 7:31PM, March 24, 2011
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Remakes and such actually can be good, if they're done by directors who were a fan of the original.

remember Freaky Friday? There's been a few remakes, and I've actually watched all of them, inducing the original movie. Each one always had something good to offer, and always retained the same basic story and kept the spirit of the message alive.

Remakes doesn't have to be completely exact, but they should still retain the basic same story, as well as the ingenuity of the characters themselves.

If you change one of those two vital things, or worse, both, then you get what is basically a remake disaster that looks nothing like it's original counterpart.

that was what was so bad about the last airbender movie. The director did keep the basic story, but completely mangled the characters and gave them no sense of direction. as an result the people new to the franchise couldn't relate to them at all, the fans of the TV show were like horrified by how the characters looked and acted.

so if people want to retell Superman's story all over again, fine. It can still be a great story. I actually got into the Smallville TV show, and became a huge fan of Lex Luthor and Clark Kent. it was actually great for a while there.
sadly, it did get a little bit stale at times, depending on who were writing the episode.

and most of the superman movies were well-received, which goes to show you that not all remakes or sequels are bad if done right.

I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:11AM
itsjustaar at 11:20PM, March 24, 2011
(online)
posts: 409
joined: 12-2-2010
I thought Superman Returns was pretty much worth the wait. xD I liked Smallville too, but I dunno if I'd want to see him growing up again …I'm still kinda hoping they'd at least pit some enemies for him by now besides Luther. Marvel seems to have practically covered their library at this point; Thor's due, and eventually Avengers. Spin-offs included. Hopefully DC follows up on this, even if most of their own listing of characters are overshadowed by Supes and the Batman.

It's pacing might have been a bit slow, in that regard. More of a melodrama than a superhero film.

Heh… the Last Airbender. xD Yeah, I honestly don't know about that one. I haven't seen the series itself, but it looked promising. It's one of those kinda films that just can't really be achieved in live-action; like DragonBall Z. It's an animation thing. Live-action and how to do it has many limitations that the drawn page or animated form really can't go. It can imitate it, but it can't meet those limitations or push forward. Only Avatar might've been capable of succeeding in this.

Since FF was a comedy film, there didn't seem like much to change it other than the setting. It's formula was more or less a gem from the get-go, and easy to follow. :D

“Keeping Up with Thursday” - Updated Every 3 Days!
“ZombieToons Must Die” - hiatus. D:
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
MrHades at 3:42AM, March 25, 2011
(online)
posts: 174
joined: 1-25-2008
There's so much rich material out there… I find it hard to believe the keep going back to old stuff. I know why they do it… you already have a fan base who want to see the film just because it's a remake. Why not take a punt on new material? You could come up with District 13, The Matrix, etc?
Hey, why not follow me on Twitter? User name: @THE_MrHades
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:08PM
itsjustaar at 3:49AM, March 25, 2011
(online)
posts: 409
joined: 12-2-2010
^

So, so true. Fan-fiction authors can come up with more original material than what Hollywood comes up with. D:

Heck, even some of the original work I come across on dA that most artists would ignore once they're done with looks better. D: … Sad, isn't it?
“Keeping Up with Thursday” - Updated Every 3 Days!
“ZombieToons Must Die” - hiatus. D:
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
BffSatan at 9:17AM, March 25, 2011
(online)
posts: 1,478
joined: 3-2-2008
I hate what Hollywood's become. It's not just remakes, but adaptations in general.
I think Hollywood just likes doing this stuff because it's a safe option as there's usually a pretty decently sized guaranteed audience.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:21AM
Abt_Nihil at 12:47PM, March 25, 2011
(offline)
posts: 1,233
joined: 8-7-2007
I think that when we look at what the studios are doing, and at what the producers are doing, then we are right in complaining about this slew of remakes and reboots. Because they are simply going the safe route - they're being lazy - and that means a lot of original projects will less likely be made.

But if we look at some of the movies that have been made, and that would never have been made if not for this trend, then I cannot complain in the least. I am incredibly happy that at last I can see decent adaptations of my childhood heroes. I can't say how many bad adaptations have to be made for one good adaptation - how many childhood heroes have to be soiled for one to be made justice - but I can't help but be grateful for, say, the current Marvel movies (especially the first two Spider-Man movies, the Iron Man movies, and I'm pretty sure the next movies won't disappoint as well).

There have been few adaptations that have been 100% satisfying, but I am still happy that even those that are flawed have been made at all. For instance, I have complained about Zack Snyder's Watchmen a million times, but it's still just great to see that movie's been made at last - and to watch all those fantastic visuals on the big screen. If we're talking about comic book movies and cartoon adaptations, they are putting the emphasis on the visuals anyway, and there are a lot of recent movies which got the visuals right, even if they disappointed in the writing department. The first Transformers had a weak script, and the second barely had anything even closely resembling one; but the visuals. Oh boy, the visuals. The visual experience of watching the first Transformers movie on the big screen was nothing short of dazzling.

So, the bottom line is: I get a kick out of seeing great visuals like the current Iron Man design in motion on the big screen.

Also, it's not like for every Transformers that gets made, one less “thinking man's movie” gets made. It simply would have been another Michael Bay movie without Transformers.
last edited on July 14, 2011 10:44AM
Genejoke at 1:22PM, March 25, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,074
joined: 4-9-2010
I don't have a huge problem with it, sure some suck but a select few are better than the originals. I prefer the remake of the ring and lets not forget that the thing which is regarded as a horror classic is a remake itself.


last edited on July 14, 2011 12:34PM
Abt_Nihil at 2:22PM, March 25, 2011
(offline)
posts: 1,233
joined: 8-7-2007
I should also mention Cronenberg's version of The Fly, which I love. The original was just another old b/w horror movie to me (sorry!), but Cronenberg's version left a great impression.
last edited on July 14, 2011 10:44AM
blindsk at 7:11PM, March 25, 2011
(online)
posts: 560
joined: 5-5-2010
Abt_Nihil
So, the bottom line is: I get a kick out of seeing great visuals like the current Iron Man design in motion on the big screen.

I think this is largely a reason why a remake can be such a good thing. But there should be a rule about it. Over the span of twenty years or more since the original will a remake actually be acceptable.

I can think of numerous remakes that brought something new to the table, but my favorite one would have to be The Thing. Hawk's original established a very creepy, very eerie horror film that, back in its day, most likely terrified its audience. Unfortunately, it would have no where near this effect on a contemporary audience. Enter John Carpenter's version. He utilized the necessary, modern tools while remaining true to the basic premise and foundation of the story so that a modern audience could appreciate the horror. He gave the original a re-imagining.

And that's honestly why I believe there should be a large chunk of time between original and remake. New technologies are developed, audiences constantly change their expectations, and a director can take a once then brilliant concept and bring it into a more modern light. But the most important thing to keep in mind is that the morals and goals of the original need to stay close to heart with the adaption.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:25AM
mlai at 7:33PM, March 27, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,035
joined: 12-28-2006
I take remakes/reboots on a case-by-case basis. Of the ones the OP mentioned…

Superman
Wow, didn't we just have one (that sucked) a few years ago? And if you're going to reboot something so quickly, why the hell are you doing the exact same plotline again??? How many times do we have to see Supes vs Lex Luthor? Batman fights other villains, Spiderman fights other villains… Superman fights a human (and not very ingenious or respectable) Luthor over and over again… while the ONLY good Supes movie ever made was when he did NOT fight Lex Luthor.

As for movie Lex Luthors… he has never been given justice. The impression Gene's Lex and Kevin's Lex gave was always that of a small, sneaky, conniving, sniveling con-artist who got a lucky break and went on a power-mad spree… doing things any criminal bent on it can do (except for the inexplicably procuring WMDs part)… and only manages to be a threat to Superman because Supes is “too noble to stoop down to Lex's level” and just squash him like a bug.

Can I please have a worthy villain for Supes whose existence does not make me disrespect Supes as a hero, please? The movie Supes, except for in II, pretty much wins the Superhero Darwin Award.

Die Hard 1
Why? I know DH1 is old, but it still holds up very well. The hero archetype is still current, and the plot doesn't have any holes in it afaik. The movie is still smart and tightly wrought. And DH4 just came and went. What can they do differently from DH4, without making the new hero seem overpowered from the start? John McClane has an excuse for being a supercop because he probably has more practical counter-terrorist experience than all of Mossad.

Oh I guess I know what they can do to “update” DH4. Make the antagonist look even more like Mark Zuckerberg so we can cheer harder when he gets his balls shot off. And his hired goons all look like Qaddafi.

CGI Secret of NIMH
Oh, God…. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~~~
LEAVE IT ALONE YOU ***HOLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go watch the original Don Bluth film, and go ahead and tell me that it's still not current. It is very current, nothing in it outdated as what you would find in Snow White or Sleeping Beauty.

It's about a small, ordinary, working-class mother (and widow!!) venturing into danger, intrigue, and wonders on a scale unimaginable for her… for the sake of her child. She gets tempted by hot hunks, and maneuvered by bully pit politicians, but never strays from her purpose. She is determined, but not fiercely feminist to the point where you feel being preached on. She is independent and brave, but always a mother and a woman before an adventurer.

All the strength she ever has, she draws from her children, never from any larger-than-life heroism streak of her own. I watched Nausicaa Valley Of The Wind about the same time as I watched Secret of NIMH, and that is one big thing I disliked about the heroine in Nausicaa compared to the mouse in SoNIMH. A hero/herine can be so perfect and heroic, that he/she defies belief. Such a hero may have been ok 30-50 years ago, but not today, while the US is psychologically recovering from worthless wars and morally bankrupt leaders of business and politics, who wave flags of storybook patriotism and heroism. Viewers want values that they can still relate to, universal values uncorruptible by leaders and media that they can no longer trust.

If anything, this film is more current now than it was in 1980. The US society is now past its spasm of assertive feminism. Housewives are once again asserting their values and sense of self-worth from the epicenter of heartland America, and it is resonating with the white-collar professional city mothers.

Watch a remake have none of the above. She'll probably slide down a staircase on a shield while shooting arrows into a horde of cats.

…why isn't this thread in Media Discussions?

FIGHT current chapter: Filling In The Gaps
FIGHT_2 current chapter: Light Years of Gold
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:07PM
elektro at 10:02PM, March 27, 2011
(online)
posts: 807
joined: 6-18-2009
Abt_Nihil
I should also mention Cronenberg's version of The Fly, which I love. The original was just another old b/w horror movie to me (sorry!), but Cronenberg's version left a great impression.

The original movie was not a black and white movie. Its crappy sequels were, but the original Fly from 1958 was a color flick, and was not a B-movie like some people think.

As to the original question, it's a case-by-case basis. For example, what some people don't know is that Scarface from 1983 is actually a remake of a movie with the same title from the 30s. People forget that because it stands out on its own without the connection, and people either love it or hate it on its own merits.

I don't care if a movie is a remake/reboot or not so long as it's a good movie on its own merits. Of course, the people who make said reboots/remakes often forget that and just make a movie because the name of the original is so marketable and they only care about money and asses in the seats, not a good movie.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:21PM
bravo1102 at 11:40PM, March 27, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
You know over the weekend I counted up the reboots of Superman done since his creation. There have been over a dozen going back to the original radio show and the Fleischer cartoons which were originally conceived as screen adaptations of the radio show.
Superman has become so iconic that it will be done again and again. This may be because of the subject matter it can be reinvented again and again because the comic has reinvented itself again and again.

Note Carpenter's the Thing was not so much a remake of the original movie as a more faithful adaptation of the original short story Campbell's “Who Goes There?” Only the title was really a reboot. It's like the many film versions of classics like Jane Eyre or Pride and Predjudice Each often goes back to the original and presents another adaptation and interpretaion. There's also the supposed remake of Charge of the Light Brigade which was not a remake but a filming of the historical account The Reason Why and easily stands on its own like Al Pacino's Scarface

Unlike Last of the Mohicans where the most recent version was based not on the original novel but the previous motion picture script and was just an updated remake. Wow just added graphic violence, Daniel Day Lewis and more accurate effects and uniforms.

And aren't we past due for a remake of Beau Geste? We did get a new Four Feathers a few years back (which was almost as good as the Korda version but there's something special about having the extras portraying the Mahdi's army including actual veterans of the Mahdi's army. ;)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:34AM
Abt_Nihil at 6:04AM, March 28, 2011
(offline)
posts: 1,233
joined: 8-7-2007
elektro
Abt_Nihil
I should also mention Cronenberg's version of The Fly, which I love. The original was just another old b/w horror movie to me (sorry!), but Cronenberg's version left a great impression.

The original movie was not a black and white movie. Its crappy sequels were, but the original Fly from 1958 was a color flick, and was not a B-movie like some people think.
Oops. I guess I just remember old films in black & white :D Or it just goes to show how little of an impression it left on me. I never saw any of the sequels.

mlai
Superman
Wow, didn't we just have one (that sucked) a few years ago? And if you're going to reboot something so quickly, why the hell are you doing the exact same plotline again???
I don't dislike Superman Returns as much as anyone else seems to do, but mainly I think it just stalled the real reboot of the franchise, which should happen as soon as possible! DC has lost a lot of time over this. There will be three new Batman films (and even a Green Lantern film!) before there'll be even one new Superman film :/
Also, how are you so sure they're doing the same plotline again? I'd certainly love to finally see a worthy villain in a Superman movie as well. But I'm also certain that if they were to use Luthor again, he'd be a much more contemporary and interesting version than the Superman Returns Luthor.
last edited on July 14, 2011 10:44AM
Hawk at 12:07PM, March 28, 2011
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
I'll be entirely honest… when I was a teenager, I enjoyed the Hollywood remakes of Little Rascals and The Addams Family. At that time, the idea of a modernized version that tried to capture the spirit of the original seemed more fresh and exciting.

I don't feel the same now. Back when the reboot thing started it felt like they were more selective with what they tried it on. Now, it seems like they're all just scrambling to snatch up anything with a remote amount of nostalgic value attached. And they're not exactly capturing the spirit of the originals… now, it's like G.I. Joe if it flew out of Michael Bay's butt, or The A Team if a bunch of twelve-year-olds wrote the script.

Hollywood's doing these movies because they consider them to be “safe”. A remake of Smurfs seems guaranteed to at least pull in the old, lapsed Smurfs fans. But right now the movie industry is in bad shape. Box office revenues have been falling, I think it can partially be blamed on the long-term results of reboot-mania. People are tired of this stuff. (also, HD TVs and home theater systems are making the wait for DVD release a much more attractive option)

When all said and done, I think it's still possible to get a good reboot movie. But it's not incredibly likely. I think this is all leading to either a crash in Holloywood, or a profitable rebirth to the movie studio that discovers what can bring audiences back to the theaters.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:47PM
mlai at 3:00AM, March 29, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,035
joined: 12-28-2006
Didn't they learn any f***ing thing from the success and positive response to Inception? The American audience is not braindead zombies moaning “Popcorrrrn…”, who'da thunk it!

The version of Luthor I like best is the “legitimate tycoon” version shown in Smallville and the cartoons. C'mon Hollywood… cartoons understand how to portray Luthor, so what the **** is wrong with you?? We're not in the 50's (or 80's) anymore.

FIGHT current chapter: Filling In The Gaps
FIGHT_2 current chapter: Light Years of Gold
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:07PM
DAJB at 8:06AM, March 29, 2011
(online)
posts: 1,462
joined: 2-23-2007
Abt_Nihil
Oops. I guess I just remember old films in black & white :D
So do I. But that's probably because, when I first saw them, it would have been on TV and - back then - all TV was in B&W!

The appetite for remakes and reboots tends to come and go in cycles as one generation of TV and movie executives replaces another, and core audiences get older before being replaced by the next. The current spate of remakes will eventually run its course and then we'll have a brief period of fresh, innovative cinema before another generation comes along and decides its time for their nostalgia boom!

What I find interesting is that the TV and movie cycles are out of step at the moment. While Hollywood movie studios are focused on rehashing old films and TV programmes, US TV is producing some of its best drama in decades (The Walking Dead, Boardwalk Empire, True Blood, Southlands etc). In the long run, I guess that means we'll at least have some pretty good TV shows to be remade when the next cycle comes around!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:04PM
DAJB at 8:28AM, March 29, 2011
(online)
posts: 1,462
joined: 2-23-2007
mlai
The version of Luthor I like best is the “legitimate tycoon” version shown in Smallville and the cartoons.
Not to turn this into a Superman thread but the Luthor I'd like to see on screen is Luthor as US President. I missed it when it happened in the comics and, when I did learn about it later, I couldn't help but think how stupid an idea that was. Having an arch mega-criminal guilty of countless murders elected to the White House? To me, it just emphasized how ridiculous comic book plotting had become.

When I think about it in these increasingly cynical times, however, I think it would could work really well on screen. By setting Superman up as the enemy of the leader of the country he's sworn to protect, he'd be forced to question the values that normally make him seem so 1950s!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:04PM
Aurora Moon at 4:02PM, March 29, 2011
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
mlai
The version of Luthor I like best is the “legitimate tycoon” version shown in Smallville and the cartoons. C'mon Hollywood… cartoons understand how to portray Luthor, so what the **** is wrong with you?? We're not in the 50's (or 80's) anymore.

I agree!! I like that version the best since how it seemed like he actually had legitimate reasons for hating superman and stuff. and at times he seemed to genuinely care for humankind, seeing Superman as nothing but an Alien Threat.
He didn't set out to be purposely evil for the sake of it for no good reason at all. He was a complex character that way, and even had Superman questioning himself at times.

However, I tend to hate it when they focus on Luthor so much as if he's the only villain that can take on superman. Come on, what about Metallo and the other supervillians that Superman has to take on on a regular basis?

At least Smallville had the good sense to not focus on Luthor as a bad guy from the get go. they instead focused on other bad guys and stuff.
they actually made him seem human and complex, and even likable.
In fact, Smallville and some of the cartoons is responsible for making me believe that Luthor is in fact just a misunderstood guy who constantly got flack because of his family and stuff, and then gave up on trying to prove to others that he was different than the rest of his family. He's a shades of gray kind of guy, instead of the typical black and white morality that everyone in the cartoons seem to have.

And to be fair, Superman can be a total ***hole at times without even trying to be or even meaning to be… is it any wonder why Luthor isn't so friendly with him (anymore)?
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:11AM
isukun at 11:57PM, March 29, 2011
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I have to agree on the Superman front. I've been trying to make my way through Smallville recently and I really do find that my favorite aspect of the show is how they treat the Lex Luthor character. I always hated the movie version. He was like a saturday morning villain fromt he 70's, evil just for the sake of being evil and inexplicably relying on two idiots to do his dirty work.

I wouldn't mind seeing the new movie focus on Lex again if they made him a deeper, more interesting character. Although I would really like to see them make something more deserving of a big Hollywood budget. It just seems like they could do a lot more with the franchise now than they could back in the 80's, so why not bring in some of the heavy hitters from the comics and really do some damage in the city of Metropolis?

I hear the Neverending Story is getting a remake, too. Although that's one I have difficulty going back to watch again, so I'm not sure that bothers me as much.

The Secret of NIMH one is unfortunate, but at the very least it's not so much a remake of the Bluth movie as it is another adaptation of the book. Not that that makes it any more promising.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
bravo1102 at 4:00AM, March 31, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,323
joined: 1-21-2008
Someone
some damage in the city of Metropolis?


Now that would be a scary reboot that would do some serious damage to a true classic. I know there was a hokey “sequel” to Things to Come but imagine any film maker trying to remake Metropolis.

I'm certain it's pitched at least twice a day.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:34AM
Frae at 9:42PM, April 2, 2011
(online)
posts: 84
joined: 1-11-2006
I'm half and half on the reboots.

Batman being rebooted good. Fast and furious being rebooted good. I'll even give scream being rebooted a green light, but the reboots start sucking when they go 3d to me. I hate 3d movie technology. You spend 14 bucks to get into the movie and then there are only like three or four 3d scenes…I guess I like reboots. I just don't like 3d
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:30PM
isukun at 10:05AM, April 3, 2011
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I don't think the move to 3D and the reliance on reboots are really related in any way. Well, except that they're both meant to draw more people to the box office.

And which reboot of Batman are you referring to? Since Warner has already announced that Batman is getting another reboot after the next Nolan film.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
Genejoke at 11:43AM, April 3, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,074
joined: 4-9-2010
I assume that is what Frae was referring to. Good plan though, that way they don't have to live up to the nolan ones so much and can do a more child friendly take.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:34PM
itsjustaar at 2:34AM, April 4, 2011
(online)
posts: 409
joined: 12-2-2010
Personally, if Hollywood really wants to get me super excited for a new Superman, it really needs to be an undeterred comedy of epic proportions based on Superfriends. It can have Wonder Dog, Braniac in short shorts, a woman in a tiger fursuit, and it's be the funniest box office smash ever. D:

LAST TIME… AT THE HALL OF JUSTICE. *vwoosh*

Now, I don't know if this counts as a remake - or maybe just an expansion? - but Leonardo DiCaprio's been talked about for a long time about bringing The Twilight Zone back into the big screen. Earlier reports used to say something along the lines that it was gonna be another anthology, but then this decision seems to have changed into just putting an episode into a whole hour and a half exploration. Doesn't seem like anything's new from what I gathered.

The TZ film is too memorable and kinda leaves a bit of a sore taste in my mouth after what happened to Vic Morrow, which is kinda saddening to remember. There's too many episodes that Rod didn't adapt from something else that might be worth a neat film. Though, things like–

Mr. Beamus = Bruce Almighty
It's a Good Life = The Omen
Five Characters in Search of an Exit = Toy Story


Eh… xD
“Keeping Up with Thursday” - Updated Every 3 Days!
“ZombieToons Must Die” - hiatus. D:
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
isukun at 11:30AM, April 4, 2011
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
The campy comedic elements of Superman have been explored to death with the past movies. That's exactly what most people are sick of in the franchise. Warner is shooting for a Justice League movie in 2013, though. It may be in their best interests not to bother trying to make that one serious.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
GameCargo at 2:35PM, April 4, 2011
(online)
posts: 38
joined: 1-8-2010
The most recent reboot I've seen was The Mechanic. Full of action, bopped to a nice soundtrack and short n' sweet. I've just now watched the original and while it's not as action oriented as the remake, I still enjoyed it. I think remakes have their place as long as they're not cash-ins. The Karate Kid reboot was “meh”, but I was never a big fan of the original anyway. The original “A better Tomorrow” will always hold a place in my memories but I still want to see the Korean remake that just came out. I don't know how I would feel on a District 13 american remake, but if they were to add Scott Adkins and Tony Jaa as the two leads, I'd be all for it.

Reboots aren't going to go away, in my opinion, just like vampire movies and date flicks. I just wish they'd come out with more sci-fi films lol.
Going through motions while I get my head straight.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:32PM
mlai at 3:02AM, April 6, 2011
(online)
posts: 3,035
joined: 12-28-2006
GameCargo
Reboots aren't going to go away, in my opinion, just like vampire movies and date flicks. I just wish they'd come out with more sci-fi films lol.
Ha, that reminds me of reboots of vampire films, specifically the Swedish Let The Right One In vs the American remake Let Me In.

I'm currently watching the Swedish one. In time, I'll catch the American one.

Critics praise both horror films to the sky. The complaint is that it's basically 2 slightly different versions of the same good story. I guess it'll be interesting to watch both and compare.

FIGHT current chapter: Filling In The Gaps
FIGHT_2 current chapter: Light Years of Gold
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:07PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved