Hot answers tagged

4

Remake: Re-making the original film, with minimal or no changes. I'd say this is wrong. A remake carries the same general plot line, but is often very different from the original. Just thinking of movies like Total Recall (2012) or The Magnificent Seven (2016) (which is, in fact, a "re-imagining" of Seven Samurai (1954)) and they're very different from ...


4

There's an answer in the article: While some at Warners consider the title among the studio's sacrosanct properties, like Casablanca, others see a need to redevelop it in an environment where studios are desperately looking for ways to monetize their libraries and branded IP is hard to come by. Basically, they are looking to make more money of an ...


4

To try to capitalise on the Spiderman name and make money. First reboot: To quote from The Huffington Post who covered this: A fourth installment of the hugely popular [original] Spider-man franchise was planned, with director Sam Raimi and star Tobey Maguire returning to their trilogy of films that had earned more than $2.5 billion at the global ...


3

I actually found this article showing the Hollywood's fastest reboots, some of them below: Name - Original Film Year release - Reboot Year Release The Amazing Spider-Man - 2002 - 2012 Rise of the Planet of the Apes - 1968 - 2001 Left Behind - 2005 - 2014 The Incredible Hulk - 2003 - 2008 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - 2007 - 2014


2

No, actors do not get royalties from reboots. The characters are the property of the writer(s), and only they are capable of getting royalties from reboots. Edit: Not sure who flagged this, but they're more than welcome to read this overly complex legalese on the subject.


2

While re-imaginings of stories have been told over and over in film and other media since long before film began, the first instance of the use of the term "reboot" was 'The Incredible Hulk' in 2008, which came out only five years after the previous movie 'Hulk'. The studio felt that they needed a word to help describe what they were doing with the movie ...


1

How about the Punisher movies? 2004 and 2008. The second one was intended as a sequel but ended up being a reboot. Also, there was a 1989 Punisher movie, but I'm not sure it counts. If it does, there are 2 reboots in 19 years.


1

Both contain references to the modern world, the original series being set after the lunar landings, and the re-imaged series being set 150,000 years before today. The implication of the final aired episode, "The Hand of God", was that the original series took place after the Apollo 11 moon landing in July 1969 (as the Galactica receives a television ...


1

I don't think it can be a sequel as both series show the destruction of, and evacuation from, Caprica and its colonies. The final episodes of the new series show that the phrase "all this has happened before..." refers to the fact


1

It may not be the first, but the earliest film reboot I know of is "The Maltese Falcon". The first film adaptation was in 1931, and the second (under the title "Satan Met A Lady") was in 1936.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible