As someone once put it, where ever childhood dreams are waiting to be raped, there's Hollywood. You know what's going to be interesting? Unlike the folks who'll be rewriting the new films, Aykroyd actually believes in ghosts.
Don't mind the idea of an extended universe, but have to see how the remake goes first. Y'know, like Marvel did with Iron Man. There are plenty of possibilities to play with, execution though...
Today, I think even good reboots are suffering from the fatigue that most have displayed with reboots in general--the problem is Hollywood keeps dipping into the well to redo things that were originally done well the first time or two it was done, adding unnecessary sequels/prequels or both. Was anyone clamoring for a sequel to Dumb and Dumber 20 years after the movie was released, to use one example?
I think the problem is volume of movies being made, they're increasingly having to try and top one another rather than focus on quality. There is a lot wrong with movie consumption at the moment - if I'm paying through the nose, then yes, I want spectacle as well as a good film. If it's just a good film, I can wait a few months for home release to watch it, and I'm comfortable in thinking I'm far from alone in that view, which means a lot of indie movies aren't getting watched at the cinema, which slants things even further towards spectacle... I've no problems with sequels, prequels or remakes so long as they're good - there are only a few tales in the world, and originality comes purely in the execution regardless of it being a standalone, part of a franchise, part of a series or a remake, so I get the fatigue but not the kneejerk "oh, it's a reboot/remake." - sorry Mr Olivier, we'll be taking that Oscar back, tsk, remaking Shakespeare...
I think part of the problem is that these big budget action blockbusters with huge amounts of special effects have become more or less the norm. Not only has this effected the quality of films being made, but it's made it hell to be an effects house, and frankly it's lowered expectations from audiences, and also of audiences from the people who make these movies.
Copyright law needs rethinking. Superman and Batman are 75 goddamned years old, their creators are dead, they ought to be public domain like Robin Hood and Dracula.
In this instance, yes. Sony could chucked out TAS3 with Garfield, however this an opportunity to bring Spidey into the MCU - and that requires another reboot. The second reboot happening so quickly is just a case of Shit Happens. Had TAS2 been better performed better at the box office, this wouldn't be happening at all - Sony would be rolling out its own SpideyVerse (which TAS2 would have made a good platform for if done correctly), instead they dropped a bollock and Marvel saw the opportunity to bring in one of their big hitters back into the fold. May as well complain when your new house burns down that you have to move again.
I semi-agree, however in an alternate universe we have The Naked Gun .44 where we have Frank Drebin in a batsuit. And its awful. As awful as most of those Dracula movies. Almost as awful as that universes' Superhero Movie, which saw geekdom track down the Wayans, ritually sodomise them with a statues of Venom and Supes, and then proceed to kill them in the manner of a 1960's Batman cliffhanger, only they've no utility belts to deal with boiling acid. And the YouTube of their murder got a higher Metacritic rating than any of their movies.
This might be the first time in the history of mankind that all the most central figures of contemporary myth are privately owned commodities.
