That Was Quick

Yesterday, the news broke that Tobey Maguire had decided not to make a 4th Spiderman movie, mostly likely because he remembers how Spiderman 3 turned out. Shortly after that came word that Marvel and Sony were going to take the Spiderman series and "reboot" (the catchy phrase of the year) it; getting a new director, a new actor to be the lead and taking Peter Parker back to high school for a new take on the series. Presumably they want to go the route of the Batman movies with Christian Bale, which was to let someone who actually likes comic books take over and make things a little darker and thus, truer to the actual comics. (At least, I would imagine. I never read Spiderman as a kid because G.I. Joe was, in every way, superior).

Here is my issue with this: you can not "reboot" a series where the first one was made less than 8 years ago and the last one came out in 2007. Just because they were in such a hurry to pump out sequels that they never bothered to secure a good script before hurrying everything into production is not our fault. This is what drives me crazy about movies - everyone is in such a hurry to make money they don't take the time to think of a fresh idea. They think if they can cash in on a movie that has made money before, then that's just as good. It's the reason there have been 24 versions of A Christmas Carol. They willingly go for profit over quality. I'm not surprised by it, just disappointed.

I don't always hate it when Hollywood takes movies that have come out before and re-makes them, but I just feel certain conditions must be met when they do it. Here are the only times I think it is acceptable to remake a movie franchise:

-It's time to introduce the franchise to a new audience. This was what made it ok for them to reboot the Star Trek franchise late this summer. The original cast is too old to keep making movies anymore (those that are even still alive) and there are almost two generations of people who have never seen the original TV series. If you're going to do it you need a very delicate mix of new people, better special effects, but you have to keep enough of the old gimmicks around to show proper respect to the original fans. Star Trek did this. To make it an even better idea, the movie also fell under the second condition in which it is ok to re-make a movie.

-You're taking things in a new direction. Not that I want to ruin it for people who haven't see Star Trek yet, but they do a plot twist that basically says, "Forget everything you thought you knew was going to happen from this time on." This allows them to do whatever the hell they want in future movies and they don't have to answer to the people who take their sci-fi too seriously. Basically they are keeping the name of the ship and the crew the same. Anything after that is fair game. It truly was a new start .

-It was a special effect-heavy movie at a time when special effects sucked. Recently I saw a trailer for the all-new Clash of the Titans. The original that came out in 1981 and became a cult classic, because now you can't look back without laughing your ass off at the 'special' effects. With the advances made in just the last couple of years, they're considered an entirely new kind of 'special'. The 2010 version that is slated to come out this summer looks like it has amazing stuff going on. I don't know how the acting or plot will hold up, but when has that ever stopped me from watching a movie?

-Let's pretend that last one didn't happen. Under these circumstances everyone sort of agrees that what started out as a promising movie series ended with such a clunker that it tainted the preceding movies and that situation should be remedied [see: Rocky 5 and Batman & Robin]. This is close to what the Spiderman people want to do, but they're trying way too soon. Even the Batman franchise gave everyone a decade to try and forget George Clooney as Bruce Wayne. Holy crap was that last one bad.