Ugh, another reboot? I know, I hear ya. But what if I told you maybe reboots aren't such a bad thing?
Hey, guys. There’s a new Flatliners movie opening this weekend! Want to come?
Wait, wait, hear me out for a second. We all heard the same thing about reboots: Hollywood is out of ideas. Creativity and originality in Hollywood is officially dead. Movies are officially dead.
However, as compelling an argument as that is, I am inclined to disagree and ask, “Do reboots really mean movies are dead or…did we already make it that way?”
Reboots, remakes, re-imaginings, and whatever word you prefer are a storytelling mechanic in not only the world of filmmaking, but also in literature. You retell poems, myths and campfire stories. You can argue that English translations of foreign works are technically retellings of the same stories but in a different language.
With the new Flatliners movie heading to theaters this Friday (I’m telling you it’s not a reboot), why all the fuss with reboots? Allow me to elaborate on this once or as many times as you like.
WHAT IS A REBOOT?
Before we look closely at reboots in today’s era of filmmaking, I want to clarify any misconceptions about what a reboot is by its definition, so I will give a quick list to demonstrate this using Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy and Marc Webb’s reboot, The Amazing Spider-Man:
It must restart at the beginning and retell the origin story. Much like Spider-Man (2002), The Amazing Spider-Man retells the same origin story of how Peter Parker gets bitten by a radioactive spider and loses his Uncle Ben to a robbery.
It must have the same characters and story elements, but with new actors. Ex. American actor Tobey Maguire plays Peter in the trilogy. The Amazing Spider-Man casts English actor Andrew Garfield as the same character. Both actors played Peter differently from one another but the stories are the same.
It cannot continue or connect into the stories of previous incarnations. Ex. The Amazing Spider-Man is not a sequel to Spider-Man 3 because Sandman doesn’t exist yet in the reboot. Therefore, these two films do not take place in the same continuity.
The exception to these three rules is called a soft reboot, a sequel that takes place in the same continuity as the previous entries but is stylistically different from them. Soft reboots can be prequels or sequels to the original movie(s) and/or television series.
Reboots can quote a familiar line or show a familiar object from previous incarnations as a homage to the original source material. Ex. “Live long and prosper,” a line first uttered by Spock in Star Trek: The Original Series is repeated by him or other characters throughout the Star Trek franchise.
Although you could “reboot” really a fancy word for “remake”, a remake is only a retelling of one stand-alone story. A reboot is really a remake of an entire franchise with several changes to the original source material. Some people, however, could argue that the term “remake” has become such a dirty word in the Hollywood limelight that “reboot” became the culturally-friendlier version. Or so it seems.
WHY WE HATE REBOOTS
I discussed the whole “We are sick and tired of the same stories because it is the same thing over and over again” in my last post concerning the horror movie genre, so this is a perfect opportunity to expand upon that tread. The irony of reboots is not only are these stories that we have seen and read a thousand before but it is also because they are the only stories that we have. In Christopher Booker’s 2004 book The Seven Basic Plots, Booker breaks down the seven archetypal stories that we see today:
Conquering the Monster: Hero defeats an evil overshadowing a peaceful land.
Rags to Riches: Hero of impoverished origins becomes rich.
The Quest: Hero leaves home to embark on a perilous adventure.
Voyage and Return: Hero enters magical realm, defeats evil, and returns matured.
Comedy: Miscommunication among characters cause wild hi-jinks.
Tragedy: Hero becomes a villain. Hero or another good guy is killed or defeated.
Rebirth: Hero is a villain who is redeemed and becomes good again.
The one major element that these stories share is a meta-plot: The hero must endure a journey or character arc, which is broken down into a three-act story structure. These archetypes serve as the basis for derivatives to fill in the blanks yet inject their own creativity to the conventions of the basic plot.
Ex. an archetypal “Conquering the Monster” story would feature a knight in shining armor slaying a fire-breathing dragon. The 2017 film adaptation of Stephen King’s novel It features seven middle-school kids coming together in order to confront a fear-inducing, child-eating monster that takes the form of a circus clown and lives in the sewers of their hometown.
Can you see how different and yet so similar these two stories are?
Any storyteller can put their own spin of a basic plot and make it work. Their version can be so good and so memorable that you can actually forget how it even is a remake. Remember Scarface, the 1932 version co-produced by Howard Hughes? Of course you don’t! All you’re thinking is the scene from the 1982 remake where Al Pacino yells, “Say hello to my little friend” before blasting a door wide open!
I enjoyed the fun 1969 Western revenge movie True Grit and John Wayne’s performance as former U.S. Marshall “Rooster” Cogburn but I love the grittier 2010 remake with Jeff Bridges’ performance as “Rooster” but with a completely new ending that is much sadder and bitter than the original. Two movies with the same story but with notable differences! So if we can make good reboots by simply getting creative with the original concept, then why do we hate reboots so much right now? It’s simple: Everyone is making a reboot in a short period of time, which happens to be this current decade.
…SO THEN WHY REBOOT EVERYTHING?
This decade alone has seen hundreds of reboots of established franchises, like James Bond, RoboCop, Batman, Captain America, and The Fantastic Four. I recall a lot of people exclaiming, “A Ghostbusters reboot? Why can’t Hollywood make something new?” and yet most of the original and smaller films such as most recent A Ghost Story or The Book of Henry that those moviegoers desire are quickly overshadowed by the bigger and louder box office. Why?
One day I came across an article about a cognitive behavior named the “Mere Exposure Effect” or simply the “Familiarity Effect”. Basically, it is a phenomenon that occurs when a person encounter a stimuli that repeatedly makes them like that stimuli more and more until the person is familiar with it.
Not to play therapist or anything, but I theorize one of the reasons why we end up going to films with a name brand is because we are exposed to that film with that name at a earlier time or age and the mere mention of the name is instantaneously recognizable to us.
Don’t believe me? Which movie are you going to see first on December 15, Ferdinand or Star Wars: The Last Jedi? Do you drink Surge or Mountain Dew?
The first name you look at should be the more recognizable name because your brain responds to that stimuli. Hollywood is desperate to fill more seats in a movie theater watching their movie than more seats at home watching Netflix, so they use brand-recognition and A-list actors to appeal to those stimuli.
Today, Hollywood started a new wave of reboots that over-saturate their own market in hopes that one of them will bring millions of people to their local theaters. When one reboot doesn’t work, the studio producing it would just throw it aside for another reboot a fresh new take. That’s why we had six Spider-Man movies in the past fifteen years.
Unfortunately, not every reboot can have the same effect as, say, the critically-acclaimed Netflix superhero show, Daredevil, whose predecessor was the style-over-substance Daredevil movie twelve years prior. The truckload of reboot titles in this decade alone proves that Hollywood is more concerned in quantity over quality.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT?
When all is said and done, film is a subjective art. Sure, we keep telling the same story again and again but the best part about remakes and reboots is that you can pick apart the familiar and the different. You can like the original more than the remake or the remake more than the original. The best thing a reboot will always do is draw more attention to the original for those unfamiliar with it, even if the reboot sucks.
Honestly, my prayer for future reboots is to stay closer to the heart of the story. Understand why these movies were so memorable to begin with, but don’t be afraid to share some new ideas every once in a while.
I want to know what you guys think. Are we getting too many reboots? What is your favorite reboot/remake/retelling? Debate them in the comments down below and share what you learned today!
WORKS CITED
Comments