Reboot is the new Remake

When it comes to movies, for every original movie idea there’s always a remake that comes around. For today’s sake there’s kind of a thin line between both original and remake which is known as a reboot. These days the way people have labeled certain movies have confused the two to the point where upcoming re-creations of movies have been labeled as a reboot as opposed to a remake. Or vice versa to some extent.

            It’s gotten to a point where some people don’t know the difference anymore.  In the last few years there have been on and off talks about Columbia doing a “Ghostbusters 3”. Although a few months ago the studio decided to go through with it; although they’re using a new cast. A female cast no less. Which is why it would be considered a remake since the original cast from the two original movies are not returning especially Bill Murray. A lot of movie news sites, fans and the Internet community on the other hand are considering it a reboot.

           

Now for those who don’t know what the difference is between a remake and a reboot, let me break down the difference between the two. A remake is a movie that is an updated creation of the original with some minor differences in the plot. Examples of movie remakes would like “Total Recall”, “True Grit”, “Clash of the Titans”, “Godzilla” and “The Italian Job” just to name a few. Remakes basically use the original movie as the main source of material but have an allusion of some changes within whether it’s the plot, dialogue, characters or whatever.

            Reboots on the other hand seem to be more of a revamp rather than a remake. These movies have more affect on an established character or franchise that have so much room story wise to where they can disregard the last movie or franchise but occasionally make a nod or reference to the previous franchise without it being too obvious. Reboots tend to touch more on movies that were a franchise or a trilogy.

Reboots also tend to be a big deal on comic book movies. Take the Batman movies for example. They made a franchise of movies in the 90’s that took some of the material from the comics but Hollywood changed many aspects of it to where it doesn't closely resemble the comic. After the critically panned “Batman & Robin” was released in 1997, it ended the Batman franchise. Warner Bros had another Batman movie ready to go but canceled it after the negative reception “Batman & Robin” got from fans and critics alike. It wasn’t until 2005 when Warner Bros released “Batman Begins” to restart the Batman franchise and bring it back to the big screen with a new actor and a darker plot that closely represented the material from the comic book. The same goes for the Spider-Man movies. The Sam Ramini movies had some ties from the comic books but were mostly Hollywood’s interpretation of the comic books. The recent Spider-Man reboot franchise on the other hand more direct to the comics even though there are some factors where Hollywood will have some plot holes different from the comic.

One would think with remakes and reboots these days Hollywood would at least do something to establish the difference between the two for the audience’s sake. Then again, the majority of the movie audiences probably don’t care because they’ve seen it all before and they just want to see something original for a change. Both remakes and reboots maybe similar but in the end people are kind of comparing apples and oranges.