Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Reboot Retardation

Seriously, whoever thought it a good idea to apply the term "reboot," to movies should probably be publicly flawed.  I feel like once that idea caught on, it was as if all the horseshit ideas of the movie industry had been loosed upon the world.

Let's get one thing straight first: there's a difference between a remake and a reboot.  Remakes are okay.  True Grit was recently remade, and it was alright.  Remakes are just taking the same movie and doing it over again.  I'm not really sure why people do that either, but it's less aggregious than a reboot.  The reboot is basically saying that someone fucked up the movie and now, for whatever reason, someone else needs to take over and do it over.

Spider-Man is getting a reboot.  Apparently there is talk of Point Break getting a reboot.  It's getting so out of hand that Superman has been rebooted, and now there's a reboot of the reboot.


I suppose that it makes sense.  Sam Rami did such a terrible job with the third installment of Spider-Man.  Fanboys all over the planet, myself included, simultaneously splooged in their pants when they heard that Venom was going to be in the film.  We were all majorly let down by a completely ridiculous and lack-luster performance from Topher Grace.  It probably wasn't the actor's fault, as an actor can only do so much with what he's given.

Sometimes reboots are good.  Look at Christopher Nolan's reboot of Batman.  The Joel Schumacher installments of the caped crusader films were horrifying, so could Batman really just be left at that?  It would be like having your dog run over in the street in front of your house and insisting on letting its rotting corpse sit in the street in front of your house; all the while, you could get someone to clean it up and get a new dog.

Should Batman have been left to rot in the street?  Seeing how amazing Nolan's Batman films are, I think it's safe to say that it was a good decision to reboot Batman.

Also getting rebooted.  Why?
This can't be said for every reboot, though.  I think it's more offensive when they reboot a reboot, or a film that was just recently made.  I get the feeling, however, that perhaps Hollywood is just running out of fresh, compelling new ideas.

Why come up with an original film when you can just reboot something?  Why create an interesting new premise when you can just attempt to redo something that's already been done?  And of course, they'll keep doing it because most people lap this shit up like mother's milk.  They expect everyone to just forget about the failures and latch on to something that hopefully achieves something good.

I think, perhaps, producers, directors, and actors should just focus on making good movies the first time around, then maybe we wouldn't have to worry about ridiculous reboots.


D Charles QC said...

I think the Spiderman reboot is more to do with trying to milk the franchis. I wonder how much the money factor takes control in some instances. They did just the same thing with Superman, remember?

My view apperas to be similar Jack when it comes to remakes. I have almost the same when it comes to music as well. If the songwriter or original preformer is not involved I tend to be very negative to any "cover" of any song regardless of the quality of the preformer. Unless, of course it is sanctioned or encouraged by the original such as with Elton John or even Cat Stevens - cannot get around calling him Yusuf regardless of his beliefs.

Back to the topic, the new Conan film is out, I will eventually watch it on DVD but for that very same reason, my enthusiasm is not very great.

Peter McCullough said...

How about a Reboot of Obama since the original is all fucked up?

Jersey McJones said...

Jack! I've had so much going on lately, I didn't even know there was a reboot of Spiderman going on! What a tragic mistake! The Spiderman franchise, however one can critique the last movie, is brilliant - the best fantasy since the original Star Wars.

Erasing that is insipid, both in forward and back thinking, monetarily and thematically.

They will harm the overall franchise for relatively small immediate gains, a ubiquitous mistake among modern American uber-capitalists.

Great post! Very provocative!


Jack Camwell said...

Thanks for the comments gents, and sorry for the late response.

Damien: I don't get excited for remakes either, unless the original was done so poorly that it warrants salvation from the heap of crappy movies.

Jersey: Spider-Man 1 and 2 were really good, but 3 was a travesty. They took one of the best Spidey villains and completely ruined it. Does it require a reboot? Probably not, so I agree with that.

Peter: Lolbus.

Harrison said...

Most movies are shit anyway. How about a movie called Reboot which is just a mish mash of previously released bad movies?

I'm waiting for the reboot of Logan's Run.

We are seeking... Sanctuary...