Thursday, May 14, 2009
Observations on the Reboot Era
The term is “reboot,” though whether it was coined by studio execs or fanboys is fuzzy. The practice is basically to take an established movie franchise that has fallen on hard times and restart it by shooting a movie that uses half to tell the origin and the other half to pit the hero against a time-honored villain.
It might be said that Joel Schumacher was the best thing that ever happened to the Batman franchise. Stay with me, here. Had Schumacher not created his wretched, LSD inspired installments of the beloved Caped Crusader, Warner Brothers would likely not have handed the reigns to the great Christopher Nolan. And there are few who would dispute that Nolan’s interpretation is the purest and most loyal rendition of the superhero, lacking such elements as the art house aesthetic that hampered the Tim Burton offerings.
When MGM decided that their beloved 007 cash cow needed a makeover for post-9/11 audiences, they dusted off Ian Fleming’s first novel about the British spy, cast the fair-haired, steely-eyed Daniel Craig, and pitted our hero against a corporate mercenary syndicate without the pithy puns or mirthful swagger of his JFK-era roots. Most agree the stylistic changes were vital to the series’ relevance and survival.
And now this past weekend saw the redux of STAR TREK, Paramount’s warhorse moneymaker, with a hip young cast of Starfleet cadets that will one day gain weight, wear dorky hairstyles, and utter flat, stilted dialogue supplemented by cheesy special effects. Box office numbers indicate J.J. Abrams’ retooling has found an audience in both 40-year-olds still living with their parents and 20-year-old coeds debating whether they would rather make-out with Kirk or Spock. And a sequel is already in the works.
A new generation of writers and directors is infusing rundown franchises of yester-decade with a tongue-in-cheek Kevin-Smithian hipness that audiences are willing to pay for in an era when economic hardship has made the box office its first victim. People want cleverness along with explosions, gunplay, and spandex-clad heroines. Who knew?
The question is: What next? Is it too early to redo DAREDEVIL after Ben Affleck immolated it in what critics and even Affleck agrees was his extended Dark Period? After the much-reviled KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, maybe Indiana Jones could use a prequel harkening back to his younger days when he was just learning how to crack the whip, read hieroglyphics, and talk pretty young scholars into bed. Sure they tried this with a TV miniseries, but let’s see what J.J. Abrams or Spike Jonze could do with a $100 million budget under Spielberg’s careful executive producer supervision.
Some would call such suggestions sacrilege, but is it wrong to make a time-honored hero or set of heroes more relevant to a new generation? It’s amusing to think what they might do with IRON MAN ten or fifteen years from now. MGM is already redoing ROBOCOP, and with the computer effects nowadays who knows if they’ll even bother cast an actor to step in for Peter Weller, or just have his costars play against empty space to be filled in with a CG character in post?
Hollywood has found a way to save itself by making the old truly new again. Despite the recent trend of studios buying more video games and comic books then they could ever possibly develop, they are sticking with what works. It makes you wonder if anyone will ever bother to come up with new heroes and franchises, or if our grandchildren will one day wait in line to see the new and improved story of a baby sent from the dying planet Krypton to become the Greatest Hero that Earth has ever known.