"Sequel-Boots" and the Comic Book Movie

Is it a sequel or a reboot? And does it matter?

Editorial Opinion
By RobGrizzly - Nov 17, 2011 10:11 PM EST
Filed Under: Fan Fic

“If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again…”

This mantra can be traced back to the 18th century as encouragement to get students to do their schoolwork. It seems this can apply to Hollywood present day. More specifically, the superhero movie.


Apparently, unlike other types of adaptations, comic book films are ripe for redo. Just look at the medium itself, and how long and varied any single property can be. Constant reinvention can keep a Wonder Woman or Fantastic Four running for 60+ years. This is how they survive.

Movies are not much different. These days, Hollywood seems to have a warped variation of the same idea. To cover money struggles, they fall back to the familiar. That means sequels, remakes and reboots. What’s interesting is Comic book movies have somehow slipped into an odd area where they can sometimes be a mash-up of these two approaches.

For studios, if an effort isn’t a home run, the answer is as simple as doing it over. But what’s fascinating about this, is often this reboot is disguised as a sequel. Or the sequel is disguised as a reboot. Sometimes it’s hard to tell. But one thing’s for sure, the studios always seem to want it both ways.
But can you have your cake and eat it too? Let’s take a look at the weird hybrid that is the “requel” or “sequel-boot”



BATMAN FOREVER from Batman Returns

SEQUEL? New helmer Joel Schumacher actually opted for a Year One-type prequel, but WB insisted on a follow-up sequel. It retains familiar actors like Alfred and Jim Gordon. ‘Black vinyl and whip’ is a reference to Batman Returns’ Catwoman.
REBOOT? A completely lighter tone and totally revamped world that is nothing like what was established by Tim Burton. An all-new lead actor as Batman. This one starts over, addressing Bruce Wayne’s past in a way the previous movies never did.
DID IT WORK? Yes. The sequel-boot went on to be highest opening weekend at the time. It spawned a follow-up (back when that meant something) and many fans and families seemed to enjoy it, especially Jim Carrey’s stand-out Riddler. Except for me. I quite disliked this film. But it looks like "The Empire Strikes Back" compared to its followup "Batman and Robin", though.



THE INCREDIBLE HULK from Hulk

SEQUEL? Loosely written as a sequel by Zak Penn- rewrites were made, but some original elements remain, such as The Abomination as the villain, hiding in South America, and even the film’s title. The film’s pacing also plays like a sequel, as the main characters already know each other.
REBOOT? New cast. The backstory is altered somewhat. Tonally, its more kinetic and stronger influenced by the TV show of the same name. The entire cast is new.
DID IT WORK? It did modest business. Fans certainly enjoyed this more action-heavy take on the character, but it could have stood to have some of Ang Lee’s style (the comic-panels) and better characterization. A mix of Lee’s seriousness, and Louis Leterrier’s excitement would have made the perfect Hulk film. As it stands, this one fares about the same for me as the other- no better or worse.



PUNISHER: WARZONE from The Punisher

SEQUEL? No origin story, as Frank Castle has been the Punisher for about 5 years already in this film. It retains the early sequel draft aspects like the villain Jigsaw and the title Warzone (which was Punisher 2: Warzone, after almost being Punisher: Welcome Back Frank)
REBOOT? Unbelievably more violent than the prior film, with a darker tone. The Punisher is a new actor, with a completely altered wardrobe. No acknowledgement of anything from the 2004 film at all.
DID IT WORK? No. A critical and commercial failure, the movie is seen as yet another black mark in the history of superhero movies. A small few have enjoyed its over-the-top violence, including myself, since it's closer to the comics.



SUPERMAN RETURNS from SUPERMAN II

SEQUEL? Superman is already established for metropolis. A main plot point revolves around the aftermath of his night with Lois at the fortress of solitude in Superman II. John Williams’ iconic score is directly lifted. Painstaking effort to bring Marlon Brando’s Jor-El back to the screen.
REBOOT? All new cast. Noticeably young-ish Superman and Lois, in hopes of longevity for the future. The first Donner films this is based off, use a straight-forward NYC-esque metropolis. Singer’s world of metropolis is a romanticized mix of modern day and golden era period. Clark’s costume is revamped.
DID IT WORK? No. The movie made a lot of money- it was the first Superman in a million years, who wasn’t going to see it? But many didn’t like what they saw. The film was too nostalgic, and oddly, lacked action. There’s a lot to admire about the ambition and scope, but the movie is held down by a bad script and many miscast actors. Case in point: WB is remaking it again as we speak.



X-MEN: FIRST CLASS from X3 The Last Stand

SEQUEL? *scratch* PREQUEL, actually, but the idea still applies. The cameos from Wolverine and Mystique (using the same actors!). The conspicuous absence of series regulars like Scott and Jean because their ages don’t line up with the timeline. A direct recreation of Magneto’s young Nazi scene from X-Men.
REBOOT? A complete change of Xavier’s character. Many altered continuities from the origin we all know, like Beast creating Cerebro, a different first class, and Charles and Mystique as BFFs. Things get more muddled if you try connecting Origins: Wolverine, but I don’t because that film is dead to me.
DID IT WORK? Sort of. A polarizing adaptation that has fans split. Some find this to be the most enjoyable X-film in ages, and even arguably the best. Others found the changes unnecessary, and even blasphemous in some degrees. Personally, I’m somewhere in the middle.




What does this mean for comics-to-film? Who knows? The results seem to vary, depending on who you ask. GHOST RIDER: SPIRIT OF VENGEANCE will be the next iteration to fall in line with the sequel-boot approach. If Warner Bros. moves forward with another Green Lantern, chances are this is the approach they will take, as well.


THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, however should be a full on reboot, unless references to Sam Raimi’s films are found. Those were very popular after all, and the choice of Lizard for villain is something Sony has been wanting to do in a sequel for a while. Time will tell, but for now whenever you hear about a Superhero reboot (Daredevil, Fantastic Four, and Blade are all rumored), be wary. The track record for this idea hasn’t been stellar, and studios still seem to want to connect these movies to the past ones.
DC & Marvel Team Up In Awesome Fan-Created Infinite Crisis Video
Related:

DC & Marvel Team Up In Awesome Fan-Created "Infinite Crisis" Video

Bill Cosby Says He Wants To Be In A Superhero Film
Recommended For You:

Bill Cosby Says He Wants To Be In A Superhero Film

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

bgharcourt
bgharcourt - 11/18/2011, 1:11 AM
good write up. the only thing i disagree with is Hulk/The Incredible Hulk

"but some original elements remain, such as The Abomination as the villain"
Dude, you do know Kris Kristofferson was Absorbing man. The only returning characters were Banner,Betty and Gen. Ross because they are the main characters in the Hulk comic.
AC1
AC1 - 11/18/2011, 2:29 AM
@bgharcourt he means the villain in the planned sequel to Hulk was Abomination. But no, I believe Incredible Hulk is a full on reboot that evolved from plans for a sequel.

Superman Returns was a loose sequel to Superman II, ignoring Superman 3 and 4. There isn't really anything to say it's a reboot, as it doesn't make an effort to change the movie series' back story, and even links to it purposely.

X-Men First Class is (as stated by Bryan Singer) a prequel to his X-Men films, X-Men 1 and 2. There are a few continuity errors but nothing major. As far as he's concerned, X3 and X-Men Origins Wolverine never happened, which also seems to be the stance Fox are taking, since The Wolverine won't be a follow up to Origins, and Deadpool will also have nothing to do with that film. If you did try to tie them to X3 and Origins, that's where most of the problems lie, the rest is just conflicting parts of throwaway dialogue from the original X-Men film.

Can't comment on Punisher, although I'd imagine it's a reboot too.

Amazing Spider-Man is definitely a reboot, as they go back to the origins and play them out differently. There may be a little nod to the Raimi films for fans, but nothing that really ties them together.

Ghost Rider Spirit of Vengeance is the only real Reboot/Sequel combo here, since they're not following entirely from the original and they're changing Ghost Rider's look dramatically, but tying it in through Nicholas Cage.

As for Green Lantern, that film is in need of a major reboot. Aboslutely atrocious film.

Good write up!
OptimusBurgundyMaximus
OptimusBurgundyMaximus - 11/18/2011, 8:00 AM
First Class is Blasphemy

yep

Things get more muddled if you try connecting X3 and X1 btw u forgot to mention
claybo4131
claybo4131 - 11/18/2011, 8:46 AM
Bgharcourt Kris Kristofferson was NOT in Hulk as The Absorbing Man, that was Nick Nolte.
golden123
golden123 - 11/18/2011, 8:27 PM
Ummmmmm....The majority of people whos saw Superman Returns liked it. That may not apply to this website, but that is because most people on here refuse to like or watch any other genres besides action and thriller. Superman Returns was primarily a drama. So fanboys complain about Superman (who was never really an action hero to begin with) never throwing a punch, an they moan about how the movie is slow and boring. They shouldn't of watched it if they don't like the drama. May I remind you that Superman Returns, on rottentomatoes.com, has a 76% for all critics, a 73% for top critics, and a 67% for audience rating. Those are all fresh scores. Also, Superman returns grossed more than the recent Thor, X-Men: First Class, and Captain America did domestically, and it grossed more than the latter two internationally.
marvelguy
marvelguy - 11/19/2011, 1:05 PM
"Superman Returns" was "Superman 2.5" It was a very much a sequel. That is why, in terms of substance, it was a terrible movie. Superman has a kid. Lois almost remembers the Fortress 'adventure.' And, then you have Luthor continuing on with a giant evil real estate scheme--after he is released from prison.

The Hulk follow-up definitely is murky with it's opening. Otherwise there is no connection other than the core Hulk elements.

'First Class' is not a prequel. It is a re-boot. There are numerous elements to the story that diverge from the first three X-Men movies.

Nice effort.
golden123
golden123 - 11/19/2011, 6:03 PM
@marvelguy: That username automatically tells me that your bias against Superman, but I will pointlessly argue with you anyways. Superman and Lois had a child after they had sex (imagine that!) which happened after they spent the night together. It's not really a hard concept. I'm not sure what part in Superman returns your talking about when you say "Lois almost remembers the Fortress 'adventure.'" Also, if Lex Luthor is a criminal because of these scams then if he stopped doing that he would no longer be a criminal. He's not going to completely change character from a greedy real estate obssessed lunatic to a cold blooded killer on his quest for physical power or to a mad scientist obssessed with permanently annihilating the Man of Steel. That would seem out of place and not right.
golden123
golden123 - 11/19/2011, 7:25 PM
@marvelguy: By the way, could you elaborate on the "numerous elements" that diverge "First Class" from being in the same continuity as the trilogy. I have no idea what your talking about, but I do know most people (including myself) seem to think it's a prequel. why did all of us miss something that you didn't?
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/19/2011, 7:47 PM
@golden123

Sorry man, but I have to say it. Lois and Clark having a child together after sexual relations is NOT as clear cut as you seem to think.

"Superman and Lois had a child after they had sex (imagine that!) which happened after they spent the night together."

I am not usually too anal about this kind of stuff, but I just want to point out it is a huge coincidence that they have compatible...organs. Even though they apparently do have compatible organs, Lois should not be conceiving. Clark is not human and therefore should not be able to impregnate a human simply because the genetic codes don't work out.

Sorry, again, I usually would have let it slide but the way you said it just irked me.
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/19/2011, 7:48 PM
AND, just because someone likes Marvel doesn't mean they are biased against Superman :P
golden123
golden123 - 11/20/2011, 9:48 AM
TheWingedWonder: Have you ever heard of a Liger or a Mule or a Zebroid or a designer dog?
golden123
golden123 - 11/20/2011, 9:53 AM
@TheWingedWonder: Also, your right, if somebody likes Marvel they are biased against Superman. This guy has Marvel is his username. DC is nowhere to be fiound in his username. That makes a statement. A statement that he doesn't neccessarily hate most DC characters, but that they aren't as good as Marvel characters. Sure, I may be steretyping although I think in this individual scenario I'm correct.
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/20/2011, 10:33 AM
@golden123

I have indeed heard of a liger, a mule, a zebroid. Designer dogs as well. These happen due to human meddling, intentional combination of their DNA, and not a natural conception through intercourse. The DNA info is inserted via artificial means directly into the womb.

Or, in the case that I am completely wrong and mistaken, those hybrids were created over centuries of evolution and natural selection through naturally occurring mutations of a singular species. So there :P

As for the whole "Marvel" in his username bit, his username says nothing besides the fact that he likes Marvel. It is not making any kind of statement as per the superiority of Marvel or the inferiority of DC. I think you are reading WAY too far into this.
golden123
golden123 - 11/20/2011, 2:22 PM
@TheWingedWonder: Wow, you are really misguided. Neither of your two ideas are true. These animals happen from regular, natural conception. Are you aware of how long mules have been around? They've been on this earth alot longer than all that messing with DNA has been practiced. It wasn't evolution either since these animals can't mate with each other. Mules can't mate with mules (they can try but they won't have babies), Ligers can't mate with Ligers, and Zebroids's can't mate with Zebroids. Their not their own species because they can't produce offspring. Mules half to come from male donkey and a female horse (the opposite way would be a hinny). Ligers come from a male Lion and a tigress (the opposite would be a Tiglon). Zebroids come from a variety of different combinations involving Zebras and other animals in the horse family).
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/20/2011, 4:16 PM
@golden123

Ah, I see. Upon reading your comment, and consequently doing some research of my own, I see you are indeed correct. I apologize for my incorrect comments which seem to have offended you (???) and still must press the point that a child between Clark and Lois would have been impossible.

In the cases which you mention, while the parents do not share the same species, they share the same genus. It is quite impossible for Clark and Lois to have the same genus seeing as they are from entirely different evolutionary trees.
marvelguy
marvelguy - 11/21/2011, 12:19 AM
Wingedwonder & Golden123:

I am not biased against Superman. The marvel in my username is that 90% of my reading comics was Marvel. That doesn't mean I'm against Superman. I'm against a terrible movie with poor casting and a recycled plot (dialogue, too).

FYI I live in reality. Nearly all of DC's animated stuff over the last two decades has been superior to Marvel's efforts. I own the entire Justice League run and "Superman TAS."

As for "First Class," my memory is a little hazy. In "X-Men," Prof. X and Magneto make no mention of knowing Logan nor having met him before. Hank McCoy shows up flesh-toned in "X2." In "The Last Stand," they meet Jean as a child and Xavier is bald and walking. I'm sure there are others that I'll recall later. There's also no indication why Sabretooth would possibly mutate further. No mention that Mystique was ever a student nor worked with Xavier. Why is Beast lion-like in the past and not in the future?
I'll leave it at that.

As for Clark conceiving with Lois, it is science fiction. When Clark lost his powers, he sweated, respired heavily, and bled. I think that's close enough to be human that he could breed with her. It's still a terrible plot and didn't help a twenty-plus years late sequel.
comiccow6
comiccow6 - 11/21/2011, 4:39 AM
Really good article!!! I like to think of reboots andSequel-Boots as Alternate dimentions like there are in comics.
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/21/2011, 4:44 AM
@marvelguy

Holy shig! I just realized how much of a hypocrite I am being! *sigh* Thank you, sir.
golden123
golden123 - 11/21/2011, 8:07 AM
@marvelguy: Ok, you were criticizing Superman, and I'm used to Marvel fanboys saying crap about DC's big five. I saw your username and immeadiatly put you in that category. Maybey, I was prejudicing. Sorry. Though now I find out you don't even like Superman II. Maybey, my assumption was right. Even if I think your a anti-DC biased Marvel lover, it doesn't mean I don't respect your opinion, and I hate you. Then again, I'm just some stranger on the internet, who thinks he knows what you like and don't like. Why do you care what I think of you?
golden123
golden123 - 11/21/2011, 8:28 AM
@TheWingedWonder: LOL, no you didn't offend me. I have actually enjoyed this debate. I'm not quite why you thought I was offended. I mean you can't really tell me that you weren't misguided and that you weren't thinking untrue ideas. I was merely pointing out the truth. I wasn't trying to critisize.
Also, in the DC universe's history, there have been stories where it is suggested that, some members of the species that would become humans migrated, through extroadinary means, to Krypton (Superman), to Thanagar, to Rann, and to Atlantis. Maybey, the Superman movie universe follows a similar rule.
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/21/2011, 9:09 AM
@golden123

You seemed offended to me because when I read your post, I could see some dude screaming it at me. :P Anyway, like I said to marvelguy, I didn't even realize what I was doing. Scientifically, I still don't think it is possible. However, this IS fantasy/science fiction/not real, and I forgot that :D So, in the name of all that is fiction, I agree with you :D
golden123
golden123 - 11/21/2011, 10:16 AM
@TheWingedWonder: Awesome!

@marvelguy: Charles or Erik never saw Wolverine's face directly. They saw him from the back and then the side. I looked the scene up on youtube to time it, and the two mutants had Wolverine in their sight for a total of nine seconds. They only were, diagonally, looking at his face for four seconds. The first X-men movie took place in 2000. First Class took place in 1962. Do you honestly believe that the fact that two men don't remember someone's face they saw for four seconds 36 years ago isn't realistic? Do you truely think that scene helps destroy any chance of First Class being in the same continuity as the other X-men films? I mean as far as I can tell, Proffesor X and Magneto aren't even aware that Wolverine age's slowly in the movies.
marvelguy
marvelguy - 11/21/2011, 2:34 PM
Golden123,

No, you're over interpreting. I loved "Superman II," and loved Donner's cut even more. It wasn't the best cbm, yet, it still worked. It's 'Returns' that is awful. "Superman II" never (in either cut) suggested Lois was impregnated. Aside from the shield gaffe, ever notice we don't know how Clark and Lois get to the diner wherein he takes a beating? Yet, we see Clark underdressed for winter, trudging his way back to the Fortress.

Per 'First Class,' when did they find Jean Grey? They are still not young, Prof. X still is without hair, and he's walking. If you watch the first X-Men movie, it states that it takes place in the not too distant future. I know this somewhat supports your argument as it would be further in this decade and basically put fifty years between 'First Class' and the other three.
How do they detect mutants in 'First Class?' I don't recall. I was under the impression they had some inkling to each mutant's power(s).

I also believe that it makes a better movie and future movies to not tie them directly to the other three. 'X3' was so awful. If I were they, I would ensure that there's no link.

I appreciate the mutual respect. I don't blindly follow any one company. Marvel has made plenty of crap movies: "Howard the Duck," Corman's "Fantastic Four," "Daredevil," "Elektra," 1990's "Captain America," and the television version of Cap was especially awful and untrue to the nature of the character.
Heck, I think I'm in the minority in enjoying "Hellboy II!"
marvelguy
marvelguy - 11/21/2011, 2:36 PM
Wingedwonder,

I think we all get caught up with cbm/comics sticking close to reality. I think of all the super that is Superman, we don't need, nor want to see SuperDad. :o)
golden123
golden123 - 11/22/2011, 11:04 AM
@marvelguy: They used a prototype version of cerebro to locate the mutants in "First Class".
marvelguy
marvelguy - 11/23/2011, 1:58 PM
That I do recall. I wasn't sure if Charles could determine their individual powers in addition to location.
bgharcourt
bgharcourt - 12/20/2011, 11:50 PM
@ACira&claybo4131: thanks for the corrections. I was having an off day.
View Recorder