EPISODE 511: REBOOTS
In this episode, Tyler and David discuss movie reboots, and the passing of Carrie Fisher.
Recent Theatrical Reviews
Recent Home Video Reviews
COMMENTARIES
PREMIUM EPISODES
In this episode, Tyler and David discuss movie reboots, and the passing of Carrie Fisher.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
More
Regarding Bond, Connery came back twice; Tyler mentioned both. David is right about Never Say Never Again, but I think Diamonds are Forever qualifies in the Bourne way. Connery did five, then left. Lazenby did On Her Majesty’s Secret Service in ’69, then Connery came back for Diamonds in ’71.
You are absolutely right. I stand corrected.
– David
Regarding the word prequel, at the time it came out, Temple of Doom was actually called a prequel a few times. Spielberg or Lucas reacted to oddness of the word as the other said it, but that’s basically where it was invented. I can’t find videos of the interviews I remember, but it appears in some reviews too:
Clunkily:
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9D06E5DF173BF930A15756C0A962948260
And directly:
http://variety.com/1984/film/reviews/indiana-jones-and-the-temple-of-doom-1200426218/
It’s kind of like how The Exorcist invented the blockbuster, even though Jaws really cemented it into the public’s lexicon. After Temple of Doom, there wasn’t much call for the term. It could have come up again, but no one was talking about Missing in Action 2: The Beginning or Puppet Master III: Toulon’s Revenge enough to need it. It hit in pretty much the same manor as the word gravitas would a year later, feeling a bit forced* upon us, when Lucas struck again with its most famous employment.
*sorry, that’s terrible.
The use of the term in Variety makes it seem like it was a recognized term in film circles. Jonathan Rosenbaum’s 1992 capsule for Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me calls it a prequel, and I remember Kevin Kline saying that Fierce Creatures (1997) wasn’t a sequel or a prequel but an “equal”.
Thanks, Dan! I knew that I’d heard it as an established term before ’99, but I sure couldn’t come up with the examples!
Sorry if my gift annoyed my fellow listeners but I’m glad you guys liked it 🙂 I also hope listeners/readers enjoy the 2017 Battleship Pretension top 100 Movie Challenge!
May I offer: Anne Hathaway and Jake Gyllenhaal or Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence as the new potential Tracy/Hepburn?
Personally I prefer Gosling & Stone to Eisenburg and Stewart.
as far as Reboots go – how do we rate Dos Equis’s “The Most Interesting Man in the World”? http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/09/07/dos-equis-names-new-most-interesting-man-in-the-world/89538838/
Whisper of the Heart is a pretty minor Ghibli film, at least in the U.S. I reviewed it here on this very site: http://battleshippretension.com/castles-in-the-sky-whisper-of-the-heart-by-aaron-pinkston/
(This doesn’t relate to anyone dying, so I think I am fine with posting the link…)
Matt Singer did a great writeup of the types of films you guys are referring to as “soft reboots”. He coined the term Legacyquel and wrote a great piece about it here. http://screencrush.com/the-age-of-legacyquels/
Though Boris Karloff indeed played the Mummy only once, the original franchise did have more than one movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy_(franchise)#Universal_Monster_Films_series_.281932.E2.80.931955.29
Rise of the Planet of the Apes, which was referred to in the podcast as a prequel, I wouldn’t really call that. I would instead put it into the reboot subcategory of a “re-imagining.” The original Planet of the Apes films had a time travel influenced time line that ended up as a “time loop.” We have yet to see if this series will go that way. The writers of the current series started at a different place in the time line, or possibly “loop,” which is why you called it a prequel, but there are many plot elements and characters that are different, its like they just took the general concept of apes becoming more intelligent and taking over the earth, intentionally forgot everything else (except their leader being named Ceaser) and started from scratch with a fresh tone.
Star Trek is an interesting case in that its soft reboot takes us back to a period, not when the movie series took place, but when the original 60’s TV series took place. Actually it takes us back to a period before the TV series for the 2009 film. I don’t think they really catch up to the “5-year mission” of the TV series until part 3 (“Beyond”). Part 2 (“Into Darkness”) had the crew run into Khan a few years earlier than they did in the TV series. A geeky examination may lead one to believe that ripples from the effects of Spock Prime’s time travel caused this meet-up of Kirk and Khan to happen in this earlier time and under different circumstances than the Space Seed episode of the original series.
You never really know the intentions of the producers. Something may seem like a reboot, but maybe it is only intended as a one-off experiment. If it makes boatloads of money, of course they will make a part two, regardless of the original intentions. Something like The Bourne Legacy I see as an experiment type of thing, where it could have been a soft reboot of a “spinoff” series, or a one-off side story, which is what it seems that it will be.
You guys were partly right and partly wrong about James Bond. Connery did actually come back for one more EON production, “Diamonds are Forever” before he left for good…and returned for the unofficial “Never Say Never Again.”
With Star Wars you have 3 “generational trilogies.” You’re going to have 3 trilogies that are in the same timeline (or Saga). Each one chronicles a successive generation. The original generation, prequel generation, and sequel generation. I wouldn’t call it a reboot in a timeline sense, but I suppose I would from a story writing perspective, since they get to start with a fresh plot (or “could” have, in the case of Force Awakens). But wait a minute…Tyler said a re-boot is “we are no longer happy with what this is, so let’s re-start it. I think the world was happy enough with Return of the Jedi, it’s just that a follow-up would make sense to have some characters of the younger generation if we set it 30 years later and with the original stars playing older versions of their characters, but now in supporting roles. Sounds kind of like Creed, which Tyler said is a sequel.
vote: Gosling/Stone