This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Do you trust me?"
11975 members | you are not logged in | 04 June 2020


January 12 2010

Reboot these Scifi shows next, Wired.coms readers plead. Wired magazine compiled a list of sci-fi TV shows ready for a reboot and first on the list: Bring back Firefly!!!

Lord, Lord, but I dislike the word 'reboot'. I'm so sick of hearing it.
Agreed, no need for rebooting it anyways just have everyone come back with an unlimited budget just as i've fantasized, many times.
Wait 10-15 more years for tech costs to go down, and then animate the whole thing Avatar style and bring back the whole cast as voice actors... Wouldn't even have to deal with them aging. Could pick up exactly where we left off.
What about Dollhouse?

Or how about a Dr Horrible reboot, brought out at the same time as the planned Dr Horrible oldboot sequel, so we can try out the oldboot and the newboot at the same time, like wearing a different boot on each foot and seeing which one we like better. Like with pie.
Quite a comprehensive list. I've never seen or even heard of some of these. Star Cops was an excellent series, worth rewatching. Quartermass looks intriguing.

My vote goes to protosteampunk series The Wild, Wild, West.
Why settle for a single reboot when you could have a dual-boot reboot or even a triple-boot reboot. Hey - my computer can do it...
Surely, reboot is the wrong word here...
I doubt it. They are rebooting Spider-man already, and the first movie was only 8 years ago also. Hollywood has gone reboot crazy.
Wouldn't it be much simpler to just re-boot Hollywood itself?
I'd like to re-boot 1994.
OK, 'Firefly' doesn't need a reboot because the original boot still has all its laces intact. Or something.

Just skimmed the suggestions but 'The Outer Limits' has already had a reboot. As has 'Quatermass' (well, a live re-enactment anyway - with David Tennant BTW, for completist fans - quite an interesting experiment too though pacing/effects etc. suffered IMO. Still, it was sort of cool to see people flub lines in a TV drama). 'Space: Above and Beyond' was a decent show but a reboot today would probably just look like a cheap BSG rip-off (when in fact it may well have provided at least some of the inspiration for that 'aircraft carrier in space' approach). Of those i'd probably most like to see "Blake's 7" and 'The Greatest American Hero' reboots/reimaginings. And 'Manimal', obviously.

And yep, only heard about the Spider-man reboot yesterday. Great pity IMO, Toby Maguire was perfectly cast and it now means 'Spider-man 3' will likely be what Raimi's remembered for in the franchise. Coincidentally I saw the trailer for 'The Karate Kid' remake yesterday too - is nothing sacred ?!? (OK, it actually looked quite good for what it was but y'know, old skool, yo ;)

[ edited by Saje on 2010-01-13 10:52 ]
Brinderwalt - you made me laugh. I'm going with your suggestion!
For all the flak Spider-Man 3 gets (it deserves it over mishandling Venom/including Venom at all--though that was studio-mandated, forced on Raimi, who apparently only wanted to do Sandman originally--and for emo-Peter), it got some things right. Thomas Hayden Church was great as Marko/Sandman (looked the part perfectly, well-acted, poignant backstory/motivation--even if it was attatched to questionable/was-that-really-necessary Uncle-Ben-retcon) and the friendship/dysfunctional relationship between the three main characters--Peter, MJ, and Harry--came to a head and had a perfectly bittersweet end, IMO. I didn't realize how much I gave a shit about Harry (despite liking James Franco in other stuff) and about the warmth between the three (when they weren't being dipshits to one another) until film #3 (and I dunno about everyone else, but I liked getting to see Harry kick some ass--his fight with Pete on the glider/in costume...big fan of that admittedly simple yet slick costume, after the awful design of the first film's suit for Willem Dafoe).

Spider-Man 3 is poor overall for its big plot, but it got most of the characters right, IMO. It didn't destroy the franchise the way X-Men: The Last Stand did (they can do more Spider-Man, not that I need more. It kinda feels like there's no salvaging the X-franchise though, which is why it sorta makes sense that Bryan Singer is tackling an Origins/pre-X-Men-1 tale next). But maybe I just had higher expectations for the X-franchise, after Singer did so well with the second film. I almost have opposite issues with those two third films of Marvel's. SM mostly respects its characters (again, emo-Peter--which maybe may've been less ridiculous without the change in hair, heh), but fails in entertaining very well with its plot, while X-Men had a lot of entertainment value with its action-plot (though it was a mistake to overstuff things with both Phoenix and the Cure storyline) but threw away almost all the character development/killed off way too many main characters (I still love everything to do with Magneto in the film though, from his reaction to a newly human Mystique to his sad scene in the park at the chess table at the end, with that fun little reveal that may never be followed up on).
What's this talk to giving up on current Spider-Man??

Oh, man. Bad move. The first two kicked ass! I've said it once, and I'll say it again- if they had just cut the 20 minute emo-Peter walk with 70s music and "I'm so badass" hair, it would have been a mostly solid 3rd movie.

I think the Spider-Man movies are about the strongest Marvel has made as of yet (let's not talk about X-men, blegh). And not counting Batman (if Marvel owns them). Batman is a very different viewing experience.

I'm so bummed. They had so many more villians already introduced (Professor with missing arm who turns into a lizard, Astronaut dumped at alter who goes to space and becomes a monster...) Very sad.

What scares me about these reboots is that it feels like they can't create new material. It's like when Disney went through the whole Little Mermaid 2 and other classic sequels. Same plot, just reversed kind of thing. (Notice how Pixar trumps how many movies *make* it to the big screen for Disney?)

That just sucks. We can't end on 3! Let's shoot for 5, and end with the feeling we had with 2.
I'll agree with Lugh's comment (at Wired): Iíve got to chime in with some others. A reboot is not the same as reviving the original series. A reboot takes the same basic premise and re-imagines it for a modern audience and using modern effects (and often reworks certain core concepts based on differences in technology). Anything as recent as Firefly, or even Bab 5 and Farscape, is too close for a reboot.

He understands what "reboot" means to The Nerd Herd. When your system's running sluggishly, restart it to flush the buffers. Alas, we can't bitch about how Firefly got weird in the 5th season. And that the third movie wasn't very good. The show never ran sluggishly; vandals smashed it.

Some reboots work. But--what about new ideas? Or using ideas from "books"--there are a lots of novels & short stories that have never been filmed.
Reboots sometimes strike me as an ignorant way of treating a franchise's fan base, they give a lot of time to exploring its mythology and background then to have it all re-written by people who don't get what its all about.

Maybe this is a rare case though, usually reboots come when a franchise is desperately in need of a refresh (Batman films, Tomb Raider games to name a couple) or respect the original fandom (like Star Trek, which linked into the original timeline well). Or its been so long since the original that no one really cares.

I don't think any of these apply to Spider-Man, nor would they to Firefly, or Buffy. I personally hope none of these go through.

Knightmare - there's a show that needs a reboot. And I'll be impressed if anyone knows what I'm talking about.
That ITV kids quiz show (or game show maybe. Anyway, there was a prize for winning) with crappy VR ? Saw it a couple of times. In its turn it was probably a "reboot" of 'The Adventure Game'. Mmm, Lesley Judd (my first 'Blue Peter' crush, probably even before I knew what a crush was ;).

Re: Spider-man, I don't think it needs one either (neither Maguire or Raimi are exactly what you'd call "played out") but probably because it's just par for the course, I actually feel slightly more forgiving about rebooting comics properties. I mean, as the other reboot thread makes clear, Spider-man has already been rebooted in the comics ([ETA]in the sense of having multiple continuities[/ETA]), this is kind of like 'Ultimate Spider-man' the movie (though I doubt it'll be closely related). Likewise it felt perfectly natural to just start again with Batman since DC have "started again" with him a few times (in terms of retconning his origin story or retconning his entire universe with the various crises) and so doing it in film feels like a continuation of that.

ETA: And not counting Batman (if Marvel owns them)

Nope, Batman is DC. Very DC in fact (he first appeared in the title DC takes its name from - 'Detective Comics'. Issue 27 BTW, if it ever comes up in Trivial Pursuit ;).

[ edited by Saje on 2010-01-13 22:47 ]

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home