The reboot problem

Name any show or movie that premiered in the last 30 years, and like a boogeyman in the mirror, a monstrous reboot is sure to rear its head. One or two of these, we had space for; who doesn’t love a second course after the entrée? It’s just a taste of something new that reminds you of what you had before. A twist on something familiar can be delightful. But when you’ve already stuffed yourself full of original characters and plotlines, having endless cheap imitations shoved down your throat might seem a little … gratuitous. Does it leave a bad taste in your mouth? Well, as a self-proclaimed representative of the reboot referendum, I’m here to tell you that you’re just being dramatic. You can never have too much of a good thing! You don’t want to seem ungrateful for the next full plate we fixed you, now do you? 

Remember how, as a kid, you used to love sitting around the TV and watching “Avatar: The Last Airbender” on Saturday mornings? How the animation captivated you, brought the characters and their bending to life. You saw examples of humane justice in Aang (Zach Tyler Eisen, “The Ant Bully”), strength in Toph Beifong (Michaela Jill Murphy, “Finding Nemo”) and unprecedented redemption in Zuko (Dante Basco, “Hook”). Now that you’re all grown up, we’ve decided to strip it from that bright, vibrant animation that constructed whole worlds and swap it for real actors and CGI with Netflix’s live-action version. You know, to make it more adult. But we’ll have to cut some of those pesky subplots that showed character progression, like Sokka’s (Jack De Sena, “The Dragon Prince”) journey away from the misogynistic beliefs he grew up with. Audiences just won’t be able to understand that kind of nuance; it might upset their stomachs. And, to make it easier to swallow, we condensed entire episodes from the original series into just five minutes to keep you consuming until you drop.

But there’s more! We don’t want an ounce of nostalgic intellectual property to go to waste. We’re stretching these as long as they’ll go. Family sitcoms like “Full House” couldn’t end there, we needed to move into a “Fuller House.” Finding out “How I Met Your Mother” wasn’t enough, we just had to know “How I Met Your Father” (with our favorite nostalgic actress to boot). Oh, did I mention the time travel from “That ’70s Show” to “That ’90s Show?” And that’s not all! We’ve got more and more and more entrées at this never-ending banquet, so make sure to arrive with an infinite appetite! 

Isn’t that just perfect? You were afraid you’d never find anything as good as the original, so Hollywood cooked up an exact copy just for you to get another taste! Well, at least as exact as they could be all these years later. See, they obviously had to change some things to suit their new-old-new audience. Times have changed; they just don’t make shows like they used to. But they definitely make the same shows that they used to. That’s very important. How else could they keep milking that cash cow, silly? 

At first, you’ll gladly let them. You’ll imagine the taste of that first episode, seeing all your old favorite characters flash across the screen again. Like with “That ’90s Show.” You’ll see Eric Forman (Topher Grace, “Spider-Man 3”) and Donna Pinciotti (Laura Prepon, “Orange is the New Black”) happily married and think, “Of course they named their daughter after princess Leia.” They’ve changed — lines of age under their eyes where bags used to be from staying out all night. It’ll make you think about how you’ve changed, too; reflect on the time when you first saw them, how the screen seemed brighter and the years hadn’t taken anything from you. That feeling will be enough to take the first bite before you realize that they’re only there for a single episode. And then you’ll be able to trudge through a dozen more focused on Leia Forman (Callie Haverda, “The Lost Husband”) and her merry band of knock-off Eric Forman friends go on tame versions of her father’s adventures. That’s a winning formula if I’ve ever seen one. 

It’s simple, really. It’s all about finding the risks that other creatives took in the past — the truly innovative projects that became cultural staples — and, instead of taking new risks in the modern day with ambitions of creating fresh cultural staples, just continuing those same stories for far longer than they were ever intended to be told. And if the original series tied up all the loose ends, we’ve just got to take some scissors to those neat threads. That way, we can all live in a never-ending, profit-filled era of low-effort audience satiation! Doesn’t that sound fun?

“Sex and the City” changed the landscape of television in the late ’90s and early 2000s. Following four 30-something-year-old women through their tumultuous romantic lives in Manhattan, the show was a breakthrough hit, immortal among its peers. It brought women-centered TV to the forefront of the medium while featuring four distinct perspectives that didn’t always harmonize. The show wasn’t afraid to honestly portray female sexuality or portray flawed characters with strong opinions, even if that pissed people off. So, with the reboot, “And Just Like That …” we had to be much more careful. These characters are in their 50s now, so of course we had to get rid of those nettlesome individual personalities. 

Miranda (Cynthia Nixon, “The Gilded Age”), the logical, cutthroat corporate lawyer, couldn’t stay that way. Corporate law takes advantage of people, and audiences just won’t root for a character who does that, so we had her quit her job, leave her husband and decide to move across the country for someone she just met. And Charlotte (Kristin Davis, “Couples Retreat”), the romantic with a good head on her shoulders, she’d have to support it unconditionally because “who (is she) to tell other people how to live their lives?” It doesn’t matter that 20 years earlier, she called Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker, “Hocus Pocus”) out for trying to do the same thing because she knew it was a bad idea. Not upsetting people is more important than tough love. The kids these days, you know, they don’t want to be challenged to see different perspectives, so we just gave them the one. 

It’s easier that way. That’s why Carrie doesn’t spend all her time worried about a man anymore and Miranda won’t have any of the cutthroat capitalist ambition she had before — audiences don’t tolerate flawed characters these days, they want perfection. We don’t want to risk offending anyone, especially not the old viewers. For them, what the characters say won’t matter because the way they dress and the way they look will be just the same. Sure, there isn’t really any comedy anymore, and the episodes are an hour-long drama instead of a lighthearted 25 minutes, but who’s counting? This reboot has something for everyone: nostalgia to bring in the old viewers, a fresh coat of paint for the new ones and a steady paycheck for the actors. 

I’m sure by trying to appeal to everyone, the creators won’t be alienating everyone! That would be impossible!

And, if TV isn’t enough, we’ve got movies to saturate with sequels, too. Fun for the whole family! If you liked Jamie Lee Curtis (“The Bear”) and Lindsay Lohan (“Mean Girls”) in “Freaky Friday,” you’ll love them in the sequel only 21 years later! We definitely needed this. Just like we needed “Top Gun: Maverick” — also over 20 years later — for creative reasons, even though Tom Cruise (“Mission: Impossible”) had said that another “Top Gun” movie would be “irresponsible.” I’m sure he’s gotten over that by now. And, hey, these are getting so much traction that people are talking about making even more sequels of movies that came out over 20 years ago. Isn’t that exciting? 

Pretty soon, we might have another “House Bunny” movie with Anna Faris (“Scary Movie”). Didn’t you just love her? Don’t you want her back on your screen? What about Kate Hudson (“Almost Famous”) being open to another “How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days” movie? We don’t want to see either of them doing one of those sad-sack rewatch podcasts because viewers forgot about them, do we? Exactly! That’s why it’s even better that we might get a real sequel to the film. It’ll absolutely be better than that TV spin-off of “10 Things I Hate About You” that they tried to do, “10 Things I Hate About Life.” Yeesh. What a dud, am I right? They’ll definitely get it right this time, and maybe the next after that, too! You can never have too much of a good thing, remember?

That’s why gutting reboots that were in the works, like the live-action adult adaptation of “The Powerpuff Girls,” is a bad idea. We can cancel original shows no matter how popular they are, but reboots are where we draw the line. Just because people are getting sick of it, doesn’t mean the food is rotten. It’s just been out for a little too long; it’ll build your endurance. 

That’s the thing about all these reboots, they’re a taste you will be forced to acquire. The production companies get to make easy projects that they know will succeed because of the built-in nostalgia bait, and all of us gullible viewers won’t even notice how little effort goes into them or how much lower the quality is. We’ll just get to stroll merrily along toward their towering buffet and gorge ourselves on their empty calories. Who cares if all the food starts tasting the same? Our palettes aren’t sophisticated enough to notice, right? It’s not as though art is supposed to be about creativity or new perspectives or new conversations. Why bother with those things when we can keep having the same conversation over the same food and the same shows and the same movies and the same degradation of art down to an act of consumption. It’s easier for us to smile from our place at the table, just like it’s easier for them to keep stocking it with the same watered-down scraps. That’s a happy ending, until the next one, and the next one and the next —

Summer Managing Arts Editor Mina Tobya can be reached at mtobya@umich.edu.

The post The reboot problem appeared first on The Michigan Daily.


Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *