Should movies/tv shows be rebooted?
Reboots. Tons of things in our lives are rebooted all the time: music, technology, movies, TV, book covers, etc. Most of the time, we look forward to these reboots. They are exciting new things or they offer improvements on the items we already have. They are a breath of fresh air. And, in today’s society, they are a necessity if a person, a company, or a fad wants to stay relevant and interesting.
But not all reboots are good, are they?
There are COUNTLESS occasions where book cover reboots are met with great annoyance and rejection from the bookish community. Program reboots can lose nice features, gain useless ones, and have an endless string of bugs in the code. Sometimes the reboot of a song (aka a re-master) just isn’t as good as the original. It happens. Yet, despite all of this, we continue to try and reboot EVERYTHING, no matter how difficult it may be to do so.
One item that is more susceptible to failures in reboots is visual media. TV shows and movies are more likely to be ruined by a reboot because you never know how the audience is going to react, especially if they saw the original. And with the way technology (and acting) has changed so much over the years, we can be sure the reboot will be QUITE different from the original.
I haven’t been alive THAT long, but I have been alive during a time when visual effects have massively improved. And, over the years, each new generation has changed and expanded their interests and ideas. As such, old movies and TV shows are constantly being re-created to update for the new technology and to offer the next generation the opportunity to enjoy what their parents enjoyed. But, of course, we can’t use the original actors, and often times we don’t even use the original story line because what appealed to viewers a couple decades ago may not appeal to them now.
Examples
Ocean’s 11
Footloose
Lost in Space
Disney (live action movies)
Horror Movies
Classics
Superheroes
The FOOTLOOSE reboot was almost identical to the original (I’ve seen both). The difference was the actors, which can make or break a movie because they have different faces, different personalities, different methods of acting. But while no one besides Kevin Bacon will ever be Kevin Bacon, the reboot was pretty close and just as good as the original.
Superhero movies are almost NEVER the same. Some are good and are heralded as amazing and always discussed no matter how many reboots came before or after, while others are train-wrecks. This depends a lot more on the actor than anything, but directors can play huge roles in this as well. Not all directors or even videographers are made equal.
And I don’t know of anyone who was happy with the added CGI effects in the STAR WARS movies because no matter how fancy they might make it look, everyone knew it looked wrong. It didn’t fit. And it only made the scenes obnoxious and awkward to anyone who had seen the original. (Too bad you can’t find the original versions anymore.)
Of course, there are also the classics. Shakespearean plays are ALWAYS being re-done in different time periods with different characters, but always with the same plot and dialogue. Some pieces are not changeable from the original no matter how hard people try, but does something have to be Shakespeare before it’s unchangeable?
Around the time the HARRY POTTER movies were coming to an end, the young actors discussed a potential re-boot in the future and which characters they would want to play at that time. But, at the end of the day, we have to ask ourselves:
Is it okay to reboot movies and TV shows?
How many times is it acceptable to re-boot something?
And how much will be lost from the original when something is rebooted?
And when does something become ruined with reboots? Can we honestly say we would look FORWARD to a HARRY POTTER reboot? How about a LORD OF THE RINGS reboot? Maybe a STAR WARS reboot? It doesn’t matter that the visual effects make them outdated because they had such a HUGE impact on generation after generation that imaging anyone else playing those roles is impossible. They cannot be redone.
Or can they?
But what do you think?
Should TV shows and movies be rebooted?
Leave your thoughts below!
And check out my discussion from forever ago:
“Women Hate Women“
Melanie Noell Bernard 
I agree with Never Not Reading. There are times where I feel like the artists involved clearly want to do “their version”, and it is radically different. Batman Begins, Sherlock (BBC), and The Thing (1982) are all examples of films that, in my opinion, approached the narrative and fictional world from a very different perspective, with very different styles and/or tones.
This is in contrast to the numerous King Kong remakes, which in many cases strike me as a technological recreation of the same narrative experience.
I generally don’t like the sentiment that an old film loses value simply because media technology advance, and I think a remake should be considered if those involved feel like they have a very distinct version that they want to share with the world, rather than simply “updating for another generation”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh man! I completely agree with you on the technological aspect. It makes me think of the Jurassic Park movies. The animitronics for those movies were FANTASTIC! No, they weren’t CGI. Yes, they are severely outdated, but who cares! They look amazing! They are iconic and no one should EVER re-make those because, at the end of the day, technology doesn’t make a story. It doesn’t actually change anything. A plot. The characters. Those change a story. Recreating a story with updated tech is a waste of time and money.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed.
Also, Jim Henson is my hero. Practical whenever he could, and only turning to digital as an accent or last resort.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rebooting or Re-imaging is a slippery slope. Superhero movies have had about a 50/50 success rate. Spider-man was rebooted three times. I really liked the Maguire’s portrayal. Garfield’s was good and they added to the original story line without it feeling as if they were changing his origin story. Holland’s Spider-man they have completely changed the origin to fit more in line with the MCU storyline vs the comic origin. I no longer collect comics, but having read the origin story, they have dumb down Spider-man from being a genius level scientist with the abilities and “powers” of a human sized spider to more like an Olympic class gymnast weight lifter with extra sensory abilities dependent upon a suit for his smarts. Spider-man was the cornerstone of Marvel Comics and ranked abilities against the likes of DC’s Superman and Batman. Now he’s a kid in a low power Ironman suit.
Fantastic Four in all three incarnations (there was a film from 1994 which never found a distributor) never met expectations. The Xmen however have hit it out the park with all branches of it’s Fox Universe. Batman(s): other than Clooney’s and Kilmer’s portrayals IMO all were great. I didn’t believe Clooney or Kilmer as a serious batman. If they went for the Adam West batman as I felt their movies were more campy, It could have worked out.
Ocean 11 (and its franchise), Foot Loose, The Italian Job, Planet of the apes (movie series), Le femme Nakita aka (IMO) Point of No Return, King Kong, and the Thing IMO were all just remakes and paid homage to the previous films. The writers and directors have just put the film modern day. Very good films. Then you have It, and The Mummy that were rebooting and re-imaging. I enjoyed them but not as much as the original.
IMO, don’t reboot or re-image. Either remake the film with a modern day time frame or continue the franchise. You loose nothing and can gain an wider audience. I see all the Batman and Xmen films as I do the James Bond films. A movie telling a story about the specific group of people in a continuing story line. Rebooting or re-imaging sounds to much like the original did something wrong, here is what it should be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, dang, Gerry. You know way more about reboots than I likely ever will and I thank you for offering your wealth of knowledge to the discussion! 😀
I’ve never been a huge fan of many of the movies you listed so I can’t say I’ve seen even one version of them, but every time a new one comes out, I’m not interested. I don’t see the point in re-making a movie over and over again, especially like King Kong. Haven’t they made 3 or 4 versions of it in the last 2 decades alone? When will it be enough?! None of them are even that good. My goodness!
As for Planet of the Apes, I can understand WHY they chose to reboot them, but I can’t say I support it. The originals are classics. The new ones… really just aren’t that good. It’s a lot more action than plot while the originals were heavily dependent upon plot and societal structure.
Eh. X-Men technically had a reboot. Not of the movies, but of the timeline, which could be seen as a continuation, but they are basically rebuilding the original movies with a new story. So it is technically a reboot like one might do with another story: same characters, different background and plot. But X-Men kind of shot themselves in the foot when they killed off some of their biggest characters (but thank god for it. I dislike superhero movies because you know no one will die. There is no suspense there.)
I guess the consensus is that we must offer something NEW, otherwise it’s a waste of time and money.
LikeLike
For me, I like a re-boot only when it has something new to offer. That’s a big part of why the live-action Disney reboots really grate my cheese. There is no reason to redo Beauty and the Beast, it was already perfect! Maleficent, on the other hand, was vastly different from Sleeping Beauty and I completely understand why people enjoyed it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
While I haven’t watched the new live action version of Beauty and the Beast, what I have seen does suggest they are strikingly similar, and I agree with you that simply recreating the same story with new tech is hardly a reason to reboot something, or rather, only updating the technology is a waste of an opportunity to truly create something new.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It was almost shot for shot the same for most of the movie. There was a small amount of added plot regarding Belle’s mother, but that was about it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That doesn’t surprise me, unfortunately.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This reminds me of the Footloose reboot, regarding similarities. It was identical. What’s the point?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh yeah! Maleficent was a new take. Though, I still like her better as a dragon, but you know. 😛 And I don’t really think the live-action Disney movies are necessary. Cinderella wasn’t really that good and neither was B&TB.
And we’ve SEEN the way Disney has attempted to EPICALLY botch the Mulan reboot. How can we support them at this rate?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. Yes. I am no longer supporting the Disney re-boots. I am actively going out of my way to NOT watch them, and especially not to pay for them. And making as much noise about it as possible without being obnoxious because I want them to know how stupid I find all of this.
And seriously, a Lion King reboot? With an all-black cast? JUST GO WATCH THE MUSICAL. It’s the same thing but SO AMAZING!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I haven’t gone quite that far, but I wanted to see them and judge them for myself.
And yas! The musical is FANTASTIC! I don’t even know why they are making a live-action Lion King. Like… are you going to CGI the lions? Because that’s not really gonna cut it. Are you going to replace the lions with people? Well, that plot-line is gonna be weird now. I dunno. That one in particular seems like such a stretch. Though, I do support the all-black cast. If they’re going to make it, at least make it right. Don’t pull another Mulan. -.-
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, the CGI animals in The Jungle Book did NOT work for me as characters at all, I can’t imagine The Lion King would be any better. And I agree, I’m with you with the all black cast, but they basically already do that on the Broadway show, except Timone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Who cares about the animals in the Jungle Book. The movie was just awful in general. Plot, excuse me? Pacing? How ’bout no.
They are doing such a poor job with these movies, I can only imagine what will happen when they make Lion King, because you know they will.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, it’s casted, they’re making it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, I know. I’ve seen the cast. I just don’t care to look.
LikeLike
Rebooting gets a lot of hate, but overall I support the attempt. Yes, it creates some real stinkers, but we also get a lot of gold out of it, too.
You mentioned Oceans 11. The new one was incredible, IMO. The new Ghostbusters turned out to be a great movie, and provided some characters that little girls everywhere can look up to. And the new Spider-man movies are the biggest advocate I can think of for reboots. Talk about a movie that NEEDED a(nother) reboot!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I will admit I have not seen the original Oceans 11, nor the new Ghostbusters. (I’m kind of bad at keeping up on movies). And I still think the new Spider-man movies were lacking.
Some reboots can be good, but there is something to be said about the originals. And while some things need a reboot, others should NEVER receive a reboot. Some things are great the first time and there’s no point ruining them by trying to redo them.
LikeLiked by 1 person