|
|
Post by egon1982 on Oct 25, 2017 4:03:05 GMT
Sometimes the word "reboot" needs to be retired on film.
DEFINITION*: verb – to restart (a computer) by loading the operating system; boot again. noun – an act or instance of restarting a computer. This word, as the definition indicates, is a computer term and had no meaning prior to the advent of PCs in the home and at work. The term was hijacked by the motion picture industry in 2005 with Batman Begins. With four prior movies produced by Warner Bros., the last of which was an unmitigated disaster, the studio wanted everyone to know that this film was something new and unrelated to the previous series. It’s no secret that a movie series will sometimes ignore a movie that bombed and just move on with the series as if that embarrassing entry never happened, so WB could have done that with Christopher Nolan’s film. That wouldn’t exactly work, though, because Nolan wanted to tell the origins of Batman, something that had not been done successfully with any of the previous movies; his take would then be a prequel except for the fact that he wanted to include the Joker in his own sequel, thereby nullifying Tim Burton’s Batman. This discontinuity would confuse the audience–how could there be two Jokers, especially with completely different origins and behaviors? Simple, this was a new series that had nothing to do with the previous films. But it wasn’t a remake of the 1989 movie because, while based on the same source material, it told a completely different story. They needed a new way of explaining what they were doing–hence the cribbing from the computer world.
Audiences bought it. They understood that the series was being “rebooted,” meaning that the old was being erased and a new “operating system” was being written in its place. The old series still existed, but this was a different take on the Batman mythology. The problem was that since the word “reboot” worked in this case, people began adopting it to refer to every instance of a new version of a known product.
Superman Returns has been dubbed a "reboot", it's not! it's part of the same franchise and ignores 3 and 4, it's a retcon sequel as it's in the same franchise.
Now, every remake and sequel is called a reboot. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance is made by other people because the first one was deemed a bad movie, let’s call it a reboot to distance itself from the original! New versions of old horror movies are made and are dubbed “reboots,” even though they tell the same story as the original movies, though perhaps elaborating the story. Even though Halloween, Friday the 13th, and Nightmare on Elm Street all spawned multiple sequels, their “reboots” retold their origins. Guess what? Those are remakes, plain and simple. You can argue that the recent versions started the series over again, but unlike Batman Begins, they don’t do a completely different take on the material.
Even films like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, I Spit on Your Grave, The Hills Have Eyes, Last House on the Left, The Crazies, Maniac, Robocop, Fright Night, Let Me In, the upcoming Overboard, the upcoming Big Trouble in Little China etc. are remakes, plain and simple.
True reboots are:
Casino Royale since it truly started the series from scratch, adapting the first James Bond book Ian Flemming wrote (the only time the book was accurately adapted for the big screen), and ignored everything that came before (though Judi Dench reprising her role as M was confusing in this context).
Spider-Man Homecoming did the Batman Begins route and ignoring 2 established series and being part of the MCU.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes due to the fact that it tells the origins of how the apes took over out world but in a completely different manner than the movie it closely emulates, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes.
Star Trek is another example as it reboots the series back to basics in an alternate universe.
Man of Steel is another example that ignores the previous Superman movies even the retcon sequel Superman Returns. It is a new take on the Superman legend.
“Reboot” is a term that is not only incorrectly attributed to the wrong type of movies, but it is overused. It’s now jumped ship to other types of entertainment. Rather than use it as a catch-all for any adaptation, we need to return to using the correct terminologies.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Oct 25, 2017 6:17:07 GMT
It feels like "Reboot" has become a euphemistic term.
|
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Oct 25, 2017 6:41:28 GMT
I call them either "REHASH" or "RETREAD" because that's what they REALLY ARE.
|
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Oct 25, 2017 6:42:25 GMT
I call them either "REHASH" or "RETREAD" because that's what they REALLY ARE. This applies to both "reboots" and "remakes".
|
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Oct 25, 2017 6:43:04 GMT
I call them either "REHASH" or "RETREAD" because that's what they REALLY ARE. This applies to both "reboots" and "remakes". And also "reimaginings".
|
|
|
|
Post by egon1982 on Nov 2, 2017 11:17:39 GMT
A not so recent phenomenon is the act of rebooting a franchise. Ever since “Batman Begins” was a success, studios have increasingly been rebooting film franchises to introduce to new audiences. The way we defined a reboot and how often we used the word has also changed. At first it seem to make sense, “Batman Begins” and “The Amazing Spider-Man” all being labeled with the term, reboot. Why does that make sense? Well, because those movies are the restart of a preexisting franchise but also is not classified as a remake (which is a whole different thing entirely). “Batman Begins” is just starting a new franchise with the Batman character (it’s not a remake of the 1989 Tim Burton “Batman” film). Somewhere though we seem to lose our basic understanding of what this word actually means. Soon movies like “Robocop”, “A Nightmare on Elm Street” Started being labeled a reboot by countless film journalists and critics (many whom I respect and admire).
Recently I’ve noticed people labeling certain movies that are not reboots with the term, reboot. The latest “Nightmare on Elm Street” for example is simply a remake of the original 1984 Wes Craven film (not a reboot). The new version takes the original film and redoes it. Sure, they may be trying to start another franchise, but it is a remake first and foremost. I would make the same argument with the 2014 “Robocop”. It may have some changes to the story, but it’s the filmmakers are redoing the original 1987 story. The remake is not just taking the character and doing something completely different, it’s the same general story. It seems now the two words are used interchangeably when there is a distinction to be had.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xcalatë on Nov 2, 2017 12:44:15 GMT
I agree, I think this term should be rebooted.
|
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Nov 2, 2017 16:36:57 GMT
Cat's outta the bag. It's 'reboot' because info age.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 2, 2017 16:55:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Nov 2, 2017 20:15:10 GMT
How about re-"boot"...
Some of these crappy newer versions, feel like Hollywood is trying shove a "boot" up our ass... and then when they create another newer version, we get another "boot" shoved up our ass...aka...Re-"BOOT"
"Here's another version whether you like it or not!"
Personally, I don't see what is wrong with just watching the originals, especially with how so many people hate the new versions. Seriously, if the original version was so great to begin with, then how can anyone really expect a new version to be better? Like I said, it feels like Hollywood keeps trying shove a "boot" up our ass...
PLEASE STOP THE RE"BOOTS"!
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Nov 2, 2017 20:59:30 GMT
Since January 1976, Lake Superior State University in Michigan has published an annual list of words and phrases that are to be from henceforth banished from the English language for “Mis-Use, Over-Use and General Uselessness.” I just checked the complete list and, to my horror, “reboot” is not on it. The choices are mostly chosen out of suggestions from the public. Since a new list is issued every January 1, there is still time to submit “reboot.” I’ve already cast my vote for this tiresome word, so let’s pile on. Here is a link to the 2017 list. In the sidebar on the left you can click to find an alphabetical list of all words banished over the last 4-plus decades. There is also a link to where you can submit a word. Let’s go get’em. Banished Words Page
|
|
|
|
Post by azzajones on Nov 3, 2017 9:08:12 GMT
While I agree 100% with the everything said about the use of the word Reboot, unfortunately, this is how society and a language changes over time. Old words take on a different meaning when they are adopted by a certain group and their use in a societies vernacular becomes different.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 3, 2017 17:39:34 GMT
I heard a radio interview with Kevin Smith talking about this exact topic (wish I could find a link to it). His thoughts were very much in line with the OP, down to citing a lot of the same examples of true reboots.
It was very interesting. He pointed out that comic books have been doing this successfully for years without the negative connotation being attached to the word, which it seems to have now with movies. He also, like the OP, pointed out the differences in remakes and reboots and thought the overuse (and sometimes incorrect use) of 'reboot' was because of people getting exhausted with all of the remakes.
At the end of the day, he advocated the word "re-imagining" as it sounded more respectfully to the universes/films/stories that had already been explored. I tend to agree with him, but "re-imagining" is a little bit more of a clunky word.
|
|
|
|
Post by _ on Nov 3, 2017 17:45:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by egon1982 on Nov 15, 2017 1:23:58 GMT
I heard a radio interview with Kevin Smith talking about this exact topic (wish I could find a link to it). His thoughts were very much in line with the OP, down to citing a lot of the same examples of true reboots. It was very interesting. He pointed out that comic books have been doing this successfully for years without the negative connotation being attached to the word, which it seems to have now with movies. He also, like the OP, pointed out the differences in remakes and reboots and thought the overuse (and sometimes incorrect use) of 'reboot' was because of people getting exhausted with all of the remakes. At the end of the day, he advocated the word "re-imagining" as it sounded more respectfully to the universes/films/stories that had already been explored. I tend to agree with him, but "re-imagining" is a little bit more of a clunky word. Indeed and you agree Batman Begins is a reboot and Elm Street is a remake?
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 15, 2017 1:32:49 GMT
How about replacing it with 'replicant'?
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Nov 15, 2017 7:54:46 GMT
I can agree.
|
|