Reboots and Rehashes – Living in the “Re-” Generation

What does is said about a major developer of video games or a major film studio when the highest quality product they’ve released in years is the same product they release ten years ago with a new coat of paint? Worse yet, why take an existing story with existing characters and turn it into something completely different? These are questions on the tips of everyones’ tongues these days. They refer, of course, to the trends of “rebooting” and “re-releasing,” both of which can be very frustrating.

Perhaps inspired by the musical notion of “remixing,” more and more big players in the media world are deciding to “reboot” their major franchises, choosing to use the same general concepts, but making the product different somehow. The result is usually a lot of people feeling apprehensive or even let down by the new direction. I can’t say that I blame them. There was a major rush of outrage when the new iterations of X-COM and Syndicate were announced to be first-person shooters. As much as fans of these series were overjoyed with the announcement of new installments, they were also disappointed that they were going to be such drastic deviations from everything that made the series good to begin with.

On the other hand, you have the equally vexing trend of re-releasing. George Lucas has caught an amazing amount of criticism for the things he changed in the blu-ray re-release of the Star Wars movies. The basis of this outrage being the things that Lucas and company chose to change about the original movies. Similar sentiments have been mirrored with many “HD remakes” of older video game classics. Often these re-releases have many things taken out, or added in a way that disrupts the flow of the original.

The truth in the matter is that remakes and reboots are necessary to keep the franchises we know and love alive due to the nature of digital media. Virtually every day, new technology is developed that makes the older technology obsolete and allows the creation of richer, more complex media. The result is the rapid aging and phasing-out of older technology, and therefore all the content that technology contained. Therefore, remakes at least are an absolute necessity. Nintendo managed to re-release HD versions of its flagship classics from the Nintendo 64 on the 3DS with remarkable fidelity while adding 3D graphics. The result was a revival of the fan base of said series as well as the opportunity for the original players to relive the experience. If this works so well for Nintendo, why is it so hard for George Lucas to understand? Why would you reboot a franchise at all if you could just freshen it up and re-release it?

I feel the true heart of the matter lies with the concept of “intellectual property.” Most of the people in control of the IPs and franchises don’t see them as beloved stories or experiences. They don’t see them as characters we relate to or memories we enjoy. They see them either pragmatically, as profitable markets that can be tapped into using the same names but different conventions, or like a controlling artist, seeking heavy-handed control of these stories and images because their view of the content has changed and they have the power to change it. The result is often the jarring alteration or even corruption of the stories and experiences we have grown to love.

In my opinion, the best way to keep a series or franchise alive is to update it and re-release it with fidelity and its original following in mind. If you really need to create a “reboot,” then why not just make a side-story or a new intellectual property altogether? Are there really so few original ideas left?

What do you think, readers? Reboots, rehashes, remakes… are they for the best?