Regular followers of the podcast will note that Stephen and I occasionally have contradictory views on certain issues. I was thus amused to find us once again disagreeing, but on opposite sides of our usual positions, regarding discussion of a rebooted ‘Back To The Future.’ I find myself thinking that perhaps it IS time for another shot at Marty and Doc’s time-travelling adventures, just in time for the real 2015 to torpedo the vision of the original trilogy and add another layer of complexity to the temporal shenanigans.
The MS-QOTD (pronounced “gig-uh-waht”) is as follows: To reboot, or not to reboot; Is it EVER a good idea?
6 Comments
Perhaps the best route would be not to reboot but to make a new trilogy with new characters but within the same continuity, Doc and Marty would only have small roles, if made right it could be really good.
Is it ever a good idea? I think it’s obvious it is. I mean Batman Begins & The Dark Knight are (IMO) the best Batman movies, they also only exist because the studios decided to reboot.
How much of a “reboot” it is vs “prequel” maybe could be argued, but I’d say X-Men: First Class is the best X-men movie.
Casino Royale is again an argued reboot-vs-sequel thing, but to most it’s a reboot and again it definitely gave new life to the Bond series.
So yes reboots can definitely be a good idea that can add new life into a series and lead to great new things.
For me, it’s not whether it’s “time” for a reboot or not, but whether or not that reboot has new things to say or a new way of looking at the property. The Dark Knight is an obvious example, and I think another great one is Fright Night – it took what was really a movie that was kind of a cheap thrill and gave it an interesting take on masculinity and male role models. It’s hard for me to say if it’s time for Back to the Future to get a reboot because I don’t know who is behind it or what they intend to do with the property.
It is as usual, a question of money for Hollywood. Are they rebooting because they think they can “reimagine” the property? Are they rebooting because film making technology has advanced to the point they can realize some of the vision they had but failed to deliver? Are they just remaking something because the principles (actor, director or producer) just love the property? These all have the potential of making a great second movie. Look at how many times Shakespeare plays has been remade.
If they are rebooting because some lame brain exec needs to generate a money maker and is trying to capitalized a “sure thing” with name recognition, then look out. You can bet he/she is going to think well, name recognition is half the battle in a successful movie, so now I can save a little cash on actors, effects or other costs, since I’ve already won the mind space battle by reusing a property.
For today’s “misquoted” (msqotd) I say. That it depends. There is an inverse relationship at play here. the sooner the reboot, the better the new one has to be. Also, the better and more singular the original, the more unnecessary the reboot is, and the better it has to be. You could reboot BTTF, for example, but there comes a point where no reboot is possible, like the Godfather.
How many times have they rebooted Robin Hood?
Of course with a reboot of this series, you can almost count on the creation of a porn parody…