I think there should be a rule at this point an IP can only get one reboot every 15 years and it has to be won in a director competition because this is ridiculous! It feels surreal how many reboots and remakes they make and they are usually always for the worst.
So are you tired of them to?
I learned a while ago that I don’t have to go see things that don’t interest me. Once you accept this, a lot of the media made that you don’t like will bother you less.
Can’t complain on the internet with a thought process like that, though. /s
Yes but you must acknowledge the crowding out effect. There are only so many screens. If so many are taken up by the never-ending sequel/adaptation/remake churn, that leaves precious little chance to actually see something original. If you’re a movie buff, I could see how that could become frustrating, even if you never watch any of the content you don’t like.
Most of the movies worth watching don’t play in theaters.
It can still be difficult to find good things because there is a sea of shit and the average person is a moron so their recommendations can’t be taken seriously.
This, plus I find it way easier to not care now that I don’t watch television anymore and have a good adblocker and so never see advertisements for movies.
Movies are so much better if you never see a trailer, and i die on that hill
I’m tired of people complaining about remakes and reboots. Original movies are released every week. If you care enough to complain, you should care enough to keep track of what movies are coming out and not rely on marketing to tell you what to see. Nobody is making you see remakes and reboots. Millions of people are seeing them so clearly, they are appealing to millions of people. If people would stop seeing them, Hollywood would stop making them.
Ah, but the production money doesn’t flow to many original movies, but almost always gets invested in existing franchises. The result is a bunch of original movies that would have been better if they’d had a bigger budget. Add to that the issue of marketing: no one is going to the film that doesn’t advertise, have guests on talk shows, and gets limited distribution. The big studios have contracts with the theaters and tiny films are frequently relegated to art houses.
Lastly, I don’t think it is fair to ask people to do homework on which movies to watch. I mean, I do that, but I’m a freak that way. Most people don’t have the time, and they aren’t looking for the next Citzen Cane, they’re looking for a light escape from a difficult week. Ideally, people would follow a critic that has tastes similar to their own, but in the fractured world of the internet, that gets hard. There are too many voices and they rotate in and out too often to figure out who’s currently matching your tastes.
People are ultimately choosing to see remakes and sequels. If it was really a huge problem for the majority of moviegoers, they’d go see original movies. Anyone who cares enough to complain should care enough to do research.
Almost a third of Americans who could vote don’t – either by not registering at all or registering but not casting a ballot. Do you really think people who don’t have the time to vote – people with jobs and/or kids at home – want to “do research” for their down time? They aren’t ‘going’ anywhere. They flip on the boob tube and catch whatever has made it to cable/free-streaming. Then they are disappointed because they liked the first one and this new one is so bad by comparison.
I’m retired, so I do research, and while I’m not the one complaining, I DO sympathize with the complainers that don’t want to invest as much time as I do on inspecting the lineage of a film and what might make it worth viewing.
I’ve seen interesting remakes and sequels – like just this week I rewatched Fassbinder’s original The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant because I hadn’t yet seen Ozon’s remake, Peter von Kant, where the main characters reverse sexes. There’s more crossovers with those two directors and I care about it, so I watch all those. What I didn’t see was all the Spidermans, Batmans, and Marvel movies.
I might complain but the real result of studio shenanigans with a publicity is I rarely goto movies. If a movie is an expensive splurge, having to work at it is much less appealing
Actually now that my kids are off to college and I’m in a good spot financially, I did briefly consider becoming a regular moviegoer for the first time in my life. Too much work for the expected entertainment value though
idk maybe this is less about watching habits and more a problem of misallocation of production equipment, in addition to the bread and gardening access problem, and union supression.
The oldest and most natural form of human storytelling is to take stories people are already familiar with and extend them or retell them in new ways… and copyright broke that form of storytelling, but we still have a thirst for it. So we get entertainment companies buying the right to exploit that thirst, for sums that make it too risky to entrust the outcome to actual artists.
I heard that the contract for fantastic 4’s IP meant the movie company had to make a movie with it at least every 10 years or they’d lose it. They subcontracted it to 20th century and because nobody gave a flaming shit about it, they put out a shitty f4 movie every 10 years.
Disney now owns the company that they contracted the rights to so they had a hand in the most recent one, but not the others afaik.
This is how Sony’s Spider-Man rights work (worked?). It’s why we’ve had 3 reboots in the last 20 years and why Marvel had to contract the rights back from Sony to get him in the Avengers movies.
The latest one was easily the worst one yet.
Oof. Gotta disagree with that. I hated the first one with Galactus and Silver Surfer. And I hated both previous versions of Doctor Doom. Still might hate this one, too, of course.
I thought this one set up the new cast without fucking anything important up, which is better than the other movies. It has a cool aesthetic.
I didn’t walk out needing more of them, though. I think some of the high points of the infinity saga are just a tough act to follow. Even movies that I really enjoyed like Thunderbolts just don’t have the same punch as Winter Soldier or Civil War.
Bad plot, extremely bad pacing, bad writing, bad acting, bad and boring fight scenes, bad villains. Galactus’s big fight was literally just… him walking through a city… The aesthetic was bizarre and did not feel authentic. Truly zero redeeming qualities.
Never saw the 90s one I take ITT?
Although it wasn’t…awful. And for the budget, the Thing costume was impressive.
No, number of shits given 0.0. You know you don’t have to watch them right ? They make them becase they work
Thanks sherlock, I use to think I had to watch each one. Glad you just let me know that information.
Only around 35% of reboots are hits. The rest are flops.
Excellent response 😂😂😂 what an obnoxious comment “YoU dOnT hAvE tO wAtCh ThEm”
And what does it mean “they make them cause they work”? Did the Snow White remake work? Or Lady and the Tramp? Or Dumbo? No, they flopped, and people hated them.
I hate these remakes and reboots. They’re awful. Sad that so much money and energy gets poured into stories that don’t need to be retold. The motivation is purely profit, and it shows.
You don’t though. My response was about the same, the lazy remakes of recent years mildly annoy me because that money could go elsewhere but other than that, meh.
I want the rule that any IP rebooted twice in a 20 year period (the age music and cars are both considered “classics” and for cars emissions tests don’t apply), the IP and any derivative works immediately becomes public domain.
just revert all copyright back to: 14 years, plus the ability to renew it one time, for 14 more
Kind of? I was tired, but then I stopped caring and just accepted most hollywood shit as garbage for morons.
Ya but they’re gonna keep happening until it becomes financially riskier to do a reboot than a new IP. Reboots will have to consistently flop hard.
Number 4 movie of the year:
Jurassic World: Rebirth $339,640,400
Last year:
Number 111 Megalopolis $7,629,085
So it sure doesn’t look like people are tired of reboots and remakes yet.
Is it though? While I didn’t watch either, I heard of one. Over and over. Everywhere. This is the first time I’ve heard of the other.
At least some of this is also self-fulfilling, not just what people want to watch
Megalopolis was a passion project for Francis Ford Coppola for decades and was well discussed in the media when it came out.
It was a struggle to go see it because nobody went and it largely vanished in a week.
I could argue similar issues with even big budget popular movies. They seem to be in theaters only a few weeks and I struggle to see even these.
That was one of my reasons for considering becoming a frequent moviegoer. I’ve only ever gone to movies I want to see, which works out to at most a half dozen per year. But given needing to pick up new hobbies, being able to afford seeing things in theaters, and how many I’ve missed out on, would it be so bad to join one of those clubs where you see a movie every couple weeks?
Jurassic world afterbirth was one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen in my life. And I enjoy bad movies, just not like that.
Jurassic world afterbirth was one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen in my life. And I enjoy bad movies, just not like that.
Depends. There are good reboots occasionally, e.g. Dune.
But most, primarily Disney IP stretching and recycling is usually not worth watching. Regardless if it a “real life version” of a classic animation or the twentieth Star Wars movie or series.
I wouldn’t really count dune as a reboot. The original dune was a complete mess and the technology wasn’t really there and no one gave enough of a shit. It’s not like a good movie was remade because they wanted to grab some cash.
OK. Yes, back then, cinematic technology was far from capable of delivering a Dune in the grandeur the story demands. I still file it under “reboot”, as the same book has been (attempted to) filmed before.
I’m going to politely disagree.
Star wars managed to show that cinema can handle grandeur. 1984 Dune can’t blame the technology of the time.
Star Wars was dreamed up by a director using the tools of the time for his filming. And there is not that much grandeur in it. Have you read Dune? That is in a whole different league than Star Wars.
I read it, And I still think it was possible, yhea, it would look more like Star Wars, but still.
My point is that it is stupid to say 1984 was a failure because of the technology of the time, while the return of the jedi looks way better (like comparing a made for TV movie with the the yearly summer blockbuster) and were made at the same year.
Yhea, there will always be better tech in the future. but that is besides the point
Controversial opinion which my dad and I share but the new Dune movies lack a level of artistry and creativity that Lynch did far better on with his. They are good movies, great even, but they just seem flat and soulless like any other Hollywood epic lately.
Dune was good? Hard disagree. Like, the FX were very nice and all, but I feel like we are past the point where good FX is a selling point. A movie like Dune needs good FX as a baseline.
But the acting? The dialogue? The plot? All very mid. And that’s what makes a movie good. I didn’t feel like I was watching pivotal moments in the history of far-flung peoples with cultures very different from my own, which simultaneously displayed the great possibilities for diversity among humanity as well as the immutible laws all societies follow. I felt like I was watching a poorly written american teen romance with fancy costumes.
Reboots and remakes are the oldest complaints in Hollywood. I’m way more sick of seeing this ancient criticism rebooted every week as if there was ever a point in history in which Hollywood was full of original ideas.
Hint: it wasn’t. Even the early days of movie making were absolutely dominated by movies made from books. Everything is a remake, rehash, retelling of some kind. That fact has no bearing on the quality of the media created. There are just as many shitty original films as there are shitty remakes, and plenty of sequels, remakes, reboots, and reimaginings that surpass the original inspiration.
True, but I’ll cut early Hollywood some slack because some of the reboots were from silent to talkies or from black and white to colour. I like the talkie version of Gunga Din better than the silent version, but I like the black and white Philadelphia Story more than the remake, High Society. The color 1942 version of Jungle Book was really good, but Disney’s cartoon version with songs and all was better childhood entertainment. I think I watched a more modern reboot at some point? That was one interation too many.
I got tired of the movie industry in general. Just stopped going to the cinema and/or buying Blu-rays.
You know you don’t have to watch them. They’re only being released because people watch them.
Went to through the entire effort of making an arr pirate ship only to realize there is jack to watch, and I would rather just spend $12 to see a movie in theater once a year, since that’s about all I ever see something new worth watching.
As usual the most useful thing that has come out of it is just getting easy access to old and foreign media which otherwise impossible to access online anyway, so now my career of sailing the high seas turned into yet another media archive collection.
The real crime here is people paying cash money to see this slop in theater. I mean I guess $12-15 is not that much, but why not use that for a different movie or even a better form of entertainment? I feel like people settle for mediocre value way too much, or find it valuable enough despite some genuinely excellent alternatives to choose from.
I feel like part of this is cultural, part is economic, and part is just statistics.
Culturally, it feels like everyone is more fatigued and stressed out. And when you feel that way, you want things that are familiar and comfortable. So if you want to go out to see a movie, you want to see something you know is going to make you feel good. Hence, you will choose Kung Fu Panda 4 rather than a psychological thriller directed by and starring no one you’ve ever heard of. Kung Fu Panda 4 might not be good, but you at least got some good feelings seeing some characters you are familiar with interact on-screen.
Economically, theatres are struggling. After all, why go to the movies when you can just watch a movie on netflix without putting on pants? Small, independent theatres are combatting this by diversifying their offerings and making the theatre experience more community-focused. They are hosting live shows, open mics, and films for niche comminities, and include time for social mixing around the theatre before and after. But large corporate theatres which are designed exclusively to churn people through a movie-watching assembly line, which have binding contracts with major movie studios, have to make blockbuster movies happen. So they do this by appealing to the lowest common denominator. Kung Fu Panda 4 might not be the biggest in terms of ticket sales, but it is a much safer bet than the aformentioned psychological thriller. So large corporate theatres pressure the large corporate movie makers to make what they are comfortable selling.
Finally, there is pure statistics. Again, netflix. You’ve rallied. You’ve remembered there is more to life than sitting on the couch. You’re gonna put on pants, goddammit! So what are you gonna do now, with an untempered spirit, the whole world in front of you, and a fully-clothed ass?
I dunno, fucking take a ballet class or something. Learn a martial art. Play tag with strangers in the park - or in a corporate office (they don’t like this). Take pictures of the moon through a telescope. Get slapped in the face by a sexy stranger in a dance club. Slap a sexy stranger in the dance club (I bet they liked it). Go find other pants to wear on other days of the week! So many options!!!
So if you are going to break free of your screen, put on pants, and go outside - why would you pay money to go right back inside and stare at a different screen? The answer is obvious - the modal person who watches movies in movie theatres is very boring, and Kung Fu Panda 4 is what they want to watch. Of course, there are plenty of not-boring people who go to the movies - but they attend far less frequently, and are less predictable in their tastes. Hence, the industry caters to people who see watching corporate movies as something worthy of putting on pants for - boring people.
I recently made an Unpopular Opinion post about this (TL;DR I’m supportive of remakes/reboots if done with genuine passion for the material, just as I am with cover versions of songs or transplantations of stage plays to modern settings/Disney cartoons, etc.):
https://lemmy.world/post/35309322
The originals aren’t going anywhere (unless you’re George Lucas 😒), and there are new films coming out every week from all over the world, the reboots/remakes are like less than 1% of what gets released in any given year. Marketing and social media can make things seem bigger and more pervasive than they actually are. Having said that, I’d honestly be happier if the number was more like 5% (with the aforementioned caveats about passion, talent and quality).
But yeah, there are lots of remakes/reboots that are borne of pure cynicism and boardroom sociopathy. Fuck those. But they aren’t the only ones on offer. Baby/bathwater.
Can you remake your unpopular opinion in my group. They banned me. My group is the same with no censorship so feel free to post any unpopular opinion you have. https://lemmy.world/c/unpopularopinionuncensored
