Star Trek: Phase II

 
Please login or register.

HELP US MAKE MORE STAR TREK PHASE 2!!!
Visit here to find out more:
>>>HELPING PHASE 2<<< 


Author Topic: Reboots  (Read 2217 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline evil_genius_180

  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 864
    • Evil Starship Factory
Re: Reboots
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2013, 11:47:30 am »
I can see doing a reboot if something bombs.  You want to start over and distance yourself as best you can from the original.  However, doing a reboot of something successful just for the sake of putting your own stamp on it or to make more money is stupid, IMHO.  The Fantastic Four movies are a great example.  Both of those movies made money.  Plus, a lot of critics and fans agreed that the second film was an improvement over the first.  So, why not keep up the trend by doing a 3rd film instead of a reboot?  Now they have to go back to the beginning and show the origin of the characters *again* with someone else's twist on it. ::)

Offline IanW

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 345
Re: Reboots
« Reply #13 on: March 04, 2013, 01:35:08 am »
Sometimes, the main reason for a reboot is to do a payroll reset.
If the first film made your cast big stars, they'll want more money to do a sequel.
A reboot will allow you to hire new actors for less money.
Hollywood is all about accountancy these days.

Offline Trekfan77

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 101
Re: Reboots
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2013, 09:32:11 am »
Remakes and Reboots have been around since the beginning of motion picture. We are only now really noticing it when we see some of our Favorite films and TV Shows remade and Rebooted. I'm all for remakes and Reboots if they are done the right way. The EVIL DEAD remake is an example that comes to mind where it was done right, not perfectly, but done right. Another would be Three Men and a Baby (Bet you didn't know that was a Remake)  and the 1986 version of The Fly. A Remake that 's done wrong would be the remake of PSYCHO which was basically a  frame for frame copy of the original, or The KNIGHT RIDER series that came out in 2008 which strayed away from the source material. Or worst The Dukes Of Hazzard Movie. Don't get me started on that one.

Offline qoSagh

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 226
Re: Reboots
« Reply #15 on: May 24, 2013, 03:07:02 pm »
I think you could do a salary reboot without a full product reboot simply by recasting. One of the best remarks about STP2 that I read was a quote by (I thik it was James) about how many people had played Willy Loman.

Why is it that a new production of an old play is called a revival and not a reboot? Because they don't try to reinvent the wheel. Look at the Early Batman movies. All more or less in continuity with each other, three different actors playing the title role. Multiple directors. As much as there are allot of complaints about them none of them were looked upon as a reboot of the earlier ones. Michael Keaton says he does not want to do another one, no problem bring in Val Kilmner.

I get that JJ's first movie was supposed to be the story of ST:TOS in the beginning, how all the characters met. The nature of this concept requires younger actors. It did not however require blowing up Vulcan, Making the Enterprise atmospheric, having Spoke hook up with Uhura (or anyone else for that matter). This is what I do not like about reboots, they seem to mostly be done by people who think the original was broken and needed fixing.

Could Starsky and Hutch have been done without it being a comedy? Could the Brady Bunch been made without them being a 70's family in a 90's world? Could Superman Return without being the messiah? The answer to all of these is yes. What if Star Trek:90210 had been made faithful to the original, so that someone coming in new to the genre could seek out other shows and movies that continue the tale of their new found favorite characters? How cool would that have been?

Offline IanW

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 345
Re: Reboots
« Reply #16 on: May 25, 2013, 05:42:25 am »
qoSagh - That's why I had high hopes for the Tom Cruise version of War of the Worlds at first.

The original announcement was that it would not be a remake of the 50's version (which was in turn a remake of Orson Welles' 1938 radio version),
but that it would be true to the original novel - set in turn-of-the-century England. Of course Cruise's cult masters soon put a stop to that.  :(


WANT TO SEE MORE EPISODES AND QUICKER RELEASE TIMES?
THEN DONATE TO HELP US MAKE MORE STAR TREK PHASE 2!!!

Visit here to find out more:
>>>HELPING PHASE 2<<<
Even a dollar or three a month helps!!!




Offline Trekfan77

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 101
Re: Reboots
« Reply #17 on: May 25, 2013, 04:35:37 pm »
qoSagh - That's why I had high hopes for the Tom Cruise version of War of the Worlds at first.

The original announcement was that it would not be a remake of the 50's version (which was in turn a remake of Orson Welles' 1938 radio version),
but that it would be true to the original novel - set in turn-of-the-century England. Of course Cruise's cult masters soon put a stop to that.  :(

That would've made the movie 100% better.

Offline qoSagh

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 226
Re: Reboots
« Reply #18 on: May 25, 2013, 04:44:50 pm »
Although this brings up an interesting point. You take a historic work like WotW, make a movie out of it that is not 100% true to the original. Years later someone decides to make a new version but be true to the original. Yet fans have come to love the first yet inconsistent version more. What do you do? Is this a repairing of damage instead of a reboot?

I remember seeing online a list of movies that you didn't know were sequels, and one of them was Die Hard. It is based on a series of books and the first movie about Detective John Mclean starred Frank Sinatra and was more police procedural than action movie with explosions. If someone were to go back to the old format and take up some of the stories, would it be a reboot of the Bruce Willis movies or a continuation of the Frank Sinatra movie? The creators of Trapper John M.D. faced this quandary in a lawsuit where they argued that they were not a spin off of the T.V. Show M*A*S*H* but a spin off of the movie M*A*S*H* (which of course were both based on the book M*A*S*H*) and thus did not owe any royalties to the producers of the T.V. Show.

Offline eagle219406

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 254
Re: Reboots
« Reply #19 on: June 10, 2013, 10:10:25 pm »
How about this?  What if you were to go to a movie, and you thoroughly enjoyed it.  Only to find out later that the movie was a reboot.   Would that change how you felt about it?

Offline Cable

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 156
Re: Reboots
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2013, 09:32:04 am »
How about this?  What if you were to go to a movie, and you thoroughly enjoyed it.  Only to find out later that the movie was a reboot.   Would that change how you felt about it?


I suspect it would not change my view on the new movie. I think that the problem with Star Trek is that there is so much history that any remake is going to be compared and contrasted to what has gone before. However, I also have seen remakes/reboots where the reboot was in many ways superior to the original product. I think it really depends on the writers/directors/actors if they bring something new and fresh to the movie. If the movie is simply a rehash of prior movies I become bored very quickly.  8)
In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri.
Douglas Adams

Offline DCR

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Reboots
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2013, 10:15:48 pm »
Personally, I care more about whether I like something than if it's a reboot or not.

I'm not overly fond of the BSG reboot because they changed some of the underpinnings which made it into the kind of show I'm not that interested in. It was a better show than the original, but the nature of the revised Cylons really didn't work for me.

With the Star Trek reboot, I like some things, I don't like others. However, I'd have liked or disliked things whether it was a reboot or not.

Having said that, there is one exception to the rule: the Legion of Super-Heroes. It's had so many bad reboots I won't read another. :)


WANT TO SEE MORE EPISODES AND QUICKER RELEASE TIMES?
THEN DONATE TO HELP US MAKE MORE STAR TREK PHASE 2!!!

Visit here to find out more:
>>>HELPING PHASE 2<<<
Even a dollar or three a month helps!!!




Offline eagle219406

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 254
Re: Reboots
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2013, 11:05:39 pm »
Although this brings up an interesting point. You take a historic work like WotW, make a movie out of it that is not 100% true to the original. Years later someone decides to make a new version but be true to the original. Yet fans have come to love the first yet inconsistent version more. What do you do? Is this a repairing of damage instead of a reboot?

I remember seeing online a list of movies that you didn't know were sequels, and one of them was Die Hard. It is based on a series of books and the first movie about Detective John Mclean starred Frank Sinatra and was more police procedural than action movie with explosions. If someone were to go back to the old format and take up some of the stories, would it be a reboot of the Bruce Willis movies or a continuation of the Frank Sinatra movie? The creators of Trapper John M.D. faced this quandary in a lawsuit where they argued that they were not a spin off of the T.V. Show M*A*S*H* but a spin off of the movie M*A*S*H* (which of course were both based on the book M*A*S*H*) and thus did not owe any royalties to the producers of the T.V. Show.

I think I know what you mean.  One example might be "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory."  I read the book in 2nd grade, and while I never saw the whole thing of the Johnny Depp version, I've seen enough clips of it to show me that it was a lot closer to the book than the Gene Wilder version was.  And I'm pretty sure people still liked the Gene Wilder version better. 

Also many people are hating movies based on books because they change so much that it was different than the book.  But take movies like, "The Wizard of Oz."  It was well received, remains a classic to this day, and was almost nothing like the book. 

Offline eagle219406

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 254
Re: Reboots
« Reply #23 on: June 12, 2013, 11:05:22 pm »
Also "A Christmas Carol" has been rebooted more times than I can count, and nobody has ever complained.

HELP US MAKE MORE STAR TREK PHASE 2!!!
Visit here to find out more:
>>>HELPING PHASE 2<<< 



 

Powered by SMF 2.0 RC4 | SMF © 2006–2011, Simple Machines LLC
SMFAds for Free Forums
Hosting and Server Administration by a.i.Built, Inc on WarpServer 02.
ModernDark64 design by Bloc
STAR TREK and all related marks, logos and characters are owned by CBS Studios Inc.
This website, the promotion thereof and/or any exhibition of material created by
the operators of this website are not endorsed or sponsored by or affiliated
with CBS/Paramount Pictures or the STAR TREK franchise.

Page created in 0.861 seconds with 32 queries.