Now Playing Tracks

thehedrick asked:

What do you think of this seemingly endless parade of sequels and reboots (especially of movies that don't effing need a sequel or reboot)? Just why hollywood, why?


It’s hard not to be frustrated, at both the lack of originality and the floundering industry that requires them. But it’s also easy to ignore. If a ‘Ghostbusters’ reboot offends you, you don’t need to go see it. The notion of a reboot, remake or sequel ruining the original only affects you if you let it. 

As far as what needs a sequel or reboot and what doesn’t, I’m totally fine with universe-building movies that have more stories to tell and ground to cover with the characters doing sequels. If the creators have a unique idea for a sequel that’s even better (think ‘22 Jump Street’). For reboots and remakes, I don’t think they’re the worst thing in the world if what is being remade needs a do over. If say the idea was good but wasn’t executed well the first time. Or if the initial premise is being expanded upon a la FX’s ‘Fargo.’

It’s interesting though, in other art forms remakes are never an issue. Plays are redone over and over (Shakespeare for example) and no one bats an eye. I think it would be cool to see that happen in film or television, with the understanding that it’s an intentional revival if that’s possible.

A good answer.


In 1982, the CIA published an illustrated guide to cliches their writers hate. Pictured, from left to right, are illustrations of “Dire Straits”, “Heightened Tensions”, and “Parameters” from the guide. Medium’s War is Boring blog has more. (here’s the full guide from the CIA.)

From the article: “Think about that for a moment. Two CIA agents hated reading the same buzzwords over and over again enough to take the time to write and illustrate a special report depicting those buzzwords as monsters.”

We make Tumblr themes