EDITORIAL: How to keep Comic Book Movies going without Rebooting it!

EDITORIAL: How to keep Comic Book Movies going without Rebooting it!

A simple Idea to keep Comic Book Films from always having to reboot...

Editorial Opinion
By BobGarlen - Nov 29, 2010 01:11 PM EST
Filed Under: Other
Source: Robert Garlen

My Idea is simple, I call it Selective Continuity Continuation, or in other words:



James Bond.

Now granted some comic book movies Need to be rebooted (Fantastic Four, X-Men, Daredevil, Transformers, and G.I.JOE to name a few) And others really won't need them, where as they can be serviced by sequels or other mediums where they can be rebooted (Such as Batman, Spider-Man, Punisher to name another few)



Demonstrated in this picture is Actors of James Bond (Almost used Doctor Who, but this somehow felt more appropriate). Each actor has Played James Bond and each film is part of what is currently a 22 Film Long Continuity, but selected entries in the series aren't that well done. For Example: Say you love Casino Royal and hated Quantum of Solace (I know writing imitating life) the pleasure of James Bond is that you can skip that one, and say that maybe the Brosnan films come before hand, or go back and say that Dr.No is it's direct sequel. The fact that this universe is so widely open offers opportunity for selective Continuity.

As Example let's say I made three Spider-Man films that just recast-ed but continued the story, I could make reference to 1 and strike 2 and 3 out, or i can make reference to all those films but re-introduce characters, example: if Doc Ock was the Villain in Spider-Man 5 all I would have to do is explain a simple way of him coming back, like the Fake Sun created a miniature atmosphere in which Doc Ock's Body was preserved. or I could create My Own Doc Ock, or Reboot the Character, while stating that Mj did date Col.Jameson yet those too events would be separated by the re-introduction.

So in short a filmmaker could select events from previous ones and do a sequel and later on the character be re-introduced or we could continue off it, and reboot the character in small fashion as to fit continuity that when said and done is ultimately the fan's choice whether or not they consider the film cannon. The only thing we'd have to stop doing is throwing a Number in front of Films and use the good ol' subtitle. Now of course for some films this would start after it's reboot in process, but afterward it would be open game for both filmmakers and fans to choose a continuity and stick with it, or break it off so that this takes place then, and then takes place now. It's a flawed idea granted but it would be a step in a better direction in my honest opinion.

Leave a comment on whether or not you agree, thank you.
About The Author:
BobGarlen
Member Since 6/3/2010
Bob Garlen - Fan Caster, Fan Fic Writer, and overall Comic Book Fan. Currently running the blog My Attempt at Film and Stuff
Magic the Gathering Just Leaked Four Epic Marvel Super Heroes Cards
Related:

Magic the Gathering Just Leaked Four Epic Marvel Super Heroes Cards

House Of The Dragon Season 3 Trailer And Premiere Date Revealed As War Continues And Revenge Is Plotted
Recommended For You:

House Of The Dragon Season 3 Trailer And Premiere Date Revealed As War Continues And Revenge Is Plotted

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that 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.

UncleBuck
UncleBuck - 11/29/2010, 1:57 PM
okay, so I have thought about this too... problem with this is you still need the audience to allow for the change in the main characters.

my solution, although equally as problematic is for the superhero/supervillian to be CGI....and the regular characters changing. this way you could turn and burn storylines. Think about a Superman movie once every 2 years. only people changing are the criminal elements.

I know horrible right?....oh well
George88
George88 - 11/29/2010, 2:01 PM
Good idea, I think they should use this idea more eg. Spiderman. Just Recast! Theres plenty of villains so all you need is too change actor/director or whatever and keep CONTINUITY!
LucasMend
LucasMend - 11/29/2010, 2:06 PM
Finally someone who agrees with me on that!
I always thought that some CBM(Batman is an example) does not need a reboot.
Batman for example, does not need to reboot after Nolan going out, just continue to the story, and get a new Wayne. God Alfread could be a la Q, always the same actor.
Same should go to MARVEL studios characters that are coming, Robert Downey Jr. at some point will not coming back to the character anymore, so they dont need to reboot it, just keep going the same story that already started. Is like on comic books, the characters change of writers, and look over the years.

Nice article man ;)
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 11/29/2010, 2:12 PM
9 Times outta 10 Reboots suck, just like Remakes!

Hollywood is over run by dildo brains! : p

Seriously...

You can only tell a different origin over an over again for the brainless...

Reboot Continuations are okay, Reboot/Remakes are not unless its X-MEN coz thats too [frick]ed up now as a franchise to even care about! : )

Rob, nice article man.
golden123
golden123 - 11/29/2010, 3:13 PM
So by saying X-Men should be rebooted means you don't truly believe in everything else you just wrote down. I agree with you on not rebooting series and following 007's way but I think X-men could be saved.
golden123
golden123 - 11/29/2010, 3:17 PM
Also I'd hate to brek it to you but Casino Royale was a reboot.
BobGarlen
BobGarlen - 11/29/2010, 3:36 PM
@golden123 Casino Royale could also be called a Prequel, but what i'm saying it's too late for some you need to restart but others it's what they need to do while they still have a chance of making good films.
Denn1s
Denn1s - 11/29/2010, 3:43 PM
i totally agree and have said it before: did james bond ever got rebooted? NO ! (casino royale is prequel) do the same with cbms...except in special situations like batman and robin...
BIGBMH
BIGBMH - 11/29/2010, 4:20 PM
I agree, kinda. I like that Nolan's Batman trilogy has a flowing story arc. I'm not really a Bond fan partially because I feel like it doesn't really build toward anything and since it's not really a connected plot, I find it hard to really get into it as a series. I think they could possibly mix the sequel, reboot, and your selective continuity idea. For example, in my Batman series of articles, I talked a little bit about how after Nolan's trilogy, I think they should do a semi-reboot that uses the Nolan trilogy as a loose history. Maybe they could do it so that there are trilogies that are pretty much self contained stories like individual Bond movies.
Joker08
Joker08 - 11/29/2010, 6:53 PM
Yeah, Casino Royale is a 100% reboot... The only reason Dench stayed on is the filmmakers said that they couldn't possibly recast her, and they changed her backstory to make up for it in the new continuity.

I don't like the idea of selective continuity, it gets confusing. The only reason it worked for the older Bond films is that they can be taken as stand-alone films, as there are never any direct sequels in a story arc. There's also the "Multiple James Bond" theory - that James Bond is a code name, just like 007, and there is more than one. This wouldn't work for Spider-Man or Batman.

I simply like the idea of recasting the lead. The way I see it, the characters are drawn differently in the comics all the time - like, sometimes Rhodey looks more like Cheadle and to other artists he looks more like Howard. I just don't like when they do it every film, as I do prefer continuity. Then, after the franchise gets old, give it a few years and reboot it...

HarrisonBergeron
HarrisonBergeron - 11/29/2010, 7:47 PM
I've been saying this for years, the idea is nothing new.

The studio needs to pick a set in stone, untouchable, character list:

Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman
Lois Lane
Lex Luthor
Jimmy Olsen
...maybe a few others

These people cannot die, and cannot be "modified" at the end of a movie, or director's helm. By "modified" I mean that Lois cannot have a kid, Jimmy Olsen cannot have super powers, etc. This way, a director whose creation bombs can be ditched leaving a fairly clean slate for the next guy. Conversely, after a successful set of movies the next director gets to unleash his entire vision, without being burdened by another director's creation.

After a few successful movies, let's say 2-3 directors, the rules can be laxed in favor of good storylines. Lex for example does not have a set in stone start point, some times he is "poor", some times he is president, sometimes he is in jail. These issues would have to be dealt with by the executive.

I don't consider it selective continuity, I consider it ambiguous continuity. There are tons of writer/director teams out there that would sell their souls to put out a Superman movie, we can either sit through tons of origin stories to get to the good/interesting stuff, or we can acknowledge that everyone going to a Superman movie knows Kal-El is the last son of Krypton and that he is a super hero in a red and blue costume who disguises himself as reporter Clark Kent.

With the right person in the executive seat of this venture continuity would be irrelevant; as long as bad guys/and good guys are not allowed to be used without the permission of an executive like Geoff Johns or possibly Christopher Nolan looking down the line and planning ahead continuity could be kept totally ambiguous. Once character like Brainiac and Darkseid ( characters we might want to hear from more than once) are introduced the executive would have to decide where the character is to be left so as not to kill future story ideas. Until characters other than the untouchables are used in more than one series there will be no evidence that a given series is, or is not, a sequel to the previous movie.

I doubt anyone read it, but it was fun typing it out. Hopefully it made sense, I did get a little carried away.
elcaballerooscuro92
elcaballerooscuro92 - 11/29/2010, 9:17 PM
this actually makes sense! i mean in the comics the characters are different depending the style of the artist, and the ystill keep continuity.
SmokinIndo
SmokinIndo - 11/29/2010, 9:39 PM
I'm going to sound like a crazy Marvel fanboy when I say this, but I think Marvel Studios' idea of continuity in their films is the perfect way to continuously make movies without the feelings of the characters getting old or stale. For instance, after Iron Man 3 comes out I simply cannot imagine another Iron Man solo film for the next ten years or so. (Assuming IM3 has the Mandarin in it.) Does that mean poor Iron Man is doomed to the same horrifying fate that plagued Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man? Of course not! That's where the Avengers comes in to reignite the Iron Man character in a brand new setting that feels completely fresh. And it doesn't just have to end there. I for one would love to see Cap and Iron Man feature in a team-up movie with just the two of them as the stars. The possibilities for putting the old shellhead into films without the need of a reboot is simply phenomenal! Props to Marvel for giving us the wonderfully brilliant MCU!
STOOPUDR
STOOPUDR - 11/29/2010, 9:56 PM
This sounds like a good idea, but I have to point out that you could have better used the 90's Batman movies as an example. Started with Keaton, then Kilmore, then Cloonie, and never redid the origin. Just recast and re-imagined, same as if the book changed artist or writer. I liked it and it was a good idea, just a shame that the writing was not better on the sequels. I personally thought Cloonie was the best, but then again I want Patrick Warburton for the next arc or a Justic League movie.

I think it would work best in multi story arcs. Say Iron Man 1-3 RDJ, IH, and Avengers, new guy for 4-6 and Avengers 2, then another for 7-9, etc. Change any of the characters as needed and keep what you want and change what you need (HULK). IH was a reboot from the Ang Lee movie, but Ruffalo is just a recast, just like Rhodes. It seems this is how Marvel is going to do it.

I love how Rhodes was introduced. Rewatch IM2 and listen to his first lines. They broke the 4th wall talking to us fans and nobody noticed. 'Yeah, Tony it's me deal with it' I am paraphrasing.
breakUbatman
breakUbatman - 11/29/2010, 10:40 PM
Problem with CBM's is that there are key moments in each characters history so if you mess up Bane for instances thers no way you can credibly bring out a Knightfall movie without rebooting. Fixing characters is harder when you dont reboot, granted it works for Bond but the question would be how many people really read Ian Flemmings novels and are dedicated followers. Personally I think Dr. No , Casino Royale and QOS are the closest you'll get to the original Bond. Its the same thing as Jason Bourne who is so far removed (now) from the original stories.

You could change a few characters but once you mess up like Batman and Robin, you've destroyed a handful of villains and your heroes. X-Men could have been salvaged but then they went ahead an made Wolverine thereby giving that franchise one of the worst continuities ever second only to The Highlander series
BetaRayB
BetaRayB - 11/30/2010, 12:25 AM
Some stuff needs to be rebooted:





Plus by rebooting these franchises, companies like Sony and FOX get to maintain the rights to these characters for years and years. It's a money pit that they will churn over a few times before Disney gets it's hands on the whole shebang. In the meantime, there is great financial incentive for them to reboot as it almost guarantees a new trilogy instead of just a single movie.
Orphix
Orphix - 11/30/2010, 1:46 AM
The trouble with using James Bond as an example is that he has very little continuity. Especially when compared with most CBM franchises.

Each Bond film is standalone. In On His Majestys Secret Service he even got married and became a widower. Then it was NEVER mentioned again.

So if you look at it that way Casino Royale (2006) is not a prequel because it doesn't tie into anything else). It is a reboot (as Quantum of Solace continues a brand new imagining of the character).
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/30/2010, 5:30 AM
This is a good idea, and kind of goes along with what i always thought.

Take Spider-Man. We've had 3 Spider-Man movies and now a reboot. Instead of rebooting, they should just make the new one and call it The Spectacular Spider-Man. Or Web of Spider-Man, or the name of one of his comics. You can have different actors if need be, it would really be no different than having a different writer/artistic team on the comics. But instead of forgetting everything that happened in the first 3, they could just do it like a new series, but keep everything that happened in continuity.
DiLusso
DiLusso - 11/30/2010, 5:45 AM
great idea! its kind of whay they did with hulk
Woodinator
Woodinator - 11/30/2010, 6:50 AM
@ArkhamsBellboy - No it isn't! Ang Lee's HULK was a stand alone! Incredible HULK was a reboot.

People are delusional if they think that those two movies tie together at all.
xmentheeight
xmentheeight - 11/30/2010, 7:32 AM
Casino Royale withstanding....its a credible idea and one to be explored. Even if that movie was a reboot....lets look at how many movies they pumped out before doing a reboot. I think the point of write up is more about that. And if anything its more of a prequel dressed as a reboot.
Knightstalker
Knightstalker - 11/30/2010, 8:25 AM
The Hoff as Nick Fury! I'd forgotten about that movie. I wish I'd never remembered.
Knightstalker
Knightstalker - 11/30/2010, 8:26 AM
Woodinator, go back and watch Incredible Hulk and pay close attention to the opening sequence. Not being critical of you, just pointing out the obvious.
AdamMichaels
AdamMichaels - 11/30/2010, 1:48 PM
I really enjoyed the way Marvel Studios handled The Incredible Hulk. We got an origin tale with Ang Lee's Hulk. Although this doesn't take place in the same continuity as Ang's, Marvel didn't waste their version retelling Hulk's origins.

They went back and explored it through flashbacks and such, but they didn't reboot anything. They kept going with Banner as the Hulk already. And that movie came out awesome.

The way I see it, some franchises don't need to be rebooted. They're better off being refreshed. The FF and DD don't need to use an entire movie retelling the origins again.
ComradeGrey
ComradeGrey - 11/30/2010, 1:59 PM
Major problem:
James Bond is one character.
The new wave of comic films are focused around micro-universes with multiple headlining characters.

Casino Royale was, in a general sense a reboot, so it undermines your argument.
TheDarqueOne
TheDarqueOne - 11/30/2010, 3:00 PM
Well this has been a spirited discussion.

The main thing I see driving movie reboots is so typical I hate to even say it. It has little to do with quality and almost nothing to do with fixing anything. Hollywood has become convinced that what the general population wants is movies about people becoming SuperHeros not being SuperHeros.

The rule used to be it had to be 10+ years since the original before you could even think of doing it over. That rule is non-existent now. Sadly this means that Hollywood is so screwed up that I will not be going to see the next Spider-Man in the theaters on principle. I have no idea if it will be good or bad but I just cannot support a reboot of what I consider to be a magnificent set of 3 Spider-Man films.

breakUbatman
breakUbatman - 11/30/2010, 11:13 PM
@ Orphix you are wrong about it never being mentioned again that he was married. I remember one of the movies has him laying flowers at her grave and I think he actually kills Blofeld as revenge. I'm too lazy to google it but you are wrong.
Orphix
Orphix - 12/1/2010, 3:24 AM
BreakUbatman@ Ah - I didn't know that. May have to do a bit of research.

Cheers dude :)
BobGarlen
BobGarlen - 12/1/2010, 4:06 AM
Actually everyone putting Casino Royal is there to represent prequels and reboots as a way of restarting broken franchises, some reboots i'm not against, but not everything needs rebooted
TheDarqueOne
TheDarqueOne - 12/2/2010, 2:16 PM
@HarrisonBergeron

I read what you wrote. It is a nice idea but it will never happen. Hollywood is not based on Characters the way the comics are. They deal with each movie (even in a trilogy) as a unique event. Worry about future movies is something to do in the future.

And I have to say that a lot of Directors would not want to work under such a system. The normal stipulations and conditions they already get are bad enough. Saying you cannot do this, or this, or this, with these Characters would be a very hard sell.

View Recorder