Building A Better Reboot: Five Films That Taught Us How It’s Done

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Lesson: Explore. Find new stories to tell and embrace modern technology to push the boundaries.

In the year 2011, long after the franchise had passed its prime and Tim Burton had pissed on its grave, nobody was clamoring for a new Planet of the Apes film. Nobody. It was dead, and desperate hopes for name recognition were Fox’s only reasons for re-launching the property.

But director Rupert Wyatt did not, presumably, see things that way. He instead saw a franchise with vast amount of untapped potential, and chose to explore the broader Apes universe in a way only modern effects would allow. This would be a grounded origin story, set in our world and playing by (mostly) scientific rules, meaning the Apes would not be speaking, walking humans in make-up, but actual chimpanzees.

Sort of. It would be impossible, of course, to get actual Apes to ‘perform’ the nuanced acting required for Rise of the Planet of the Apes, so Wyatt cast motion-capture guru Andy Serkis as protagonist Ceaser, and hired the brilliant artists at Weta Digital to bring him and the other chimpanzees to life. The result was a completely unexpected treat that explored the Apes world in bold new ways: A film about an ape, told from the point-of-view of an ape, without anthropomorphizing him until the very, very end.

It is a fascinating, beautifully realized story, one that succeeds on strength of creative ingenuity and craftsmanship. It proves that, in addition to exploring outside a franchise’s comfort zone, a reboot should embrace how filmmaking has involved since the property’s inception. Though the Apes series had attempted an origin story before, the plot of Rise could never be told with 1960s or 70s effects. It had to be made today, when Weta could animate utterly authentic Apes. Wyatt’s embrace of technology is paramount to telling this intriguing new story, and even sparked a large, industry-wide conversation about whether or not motion-capture performances count as ‘real’ acting (they should, of course).

Rise of the Planet of the Apes is the most recent film on this list, and it marks an intriguing direction for subsequent reboots to take. Using modern technology to foster creative exploration of seemingly familiar territory may be the key to revitalizing several of Hollywood’s most bankable properties. Combined with the other lessons recounted here, there are clear and promising paths that Hollywood can take to ensure their reboots are more than empty cash grabs. For at its best, the reboot can be a truly exciting proposition.

What reboots are your favorites? What are other ‘lessons’ you think Hollywood should take to heart when re-launching franchises? Sound off in the comments!

http://www.gamingblend.com/ William Usher

Call me crazy but I actually enjoyed Ang Lee’s Hulk as time goes on. It seems to hold its own as it ages. I also liked that Lee’s vision of the Hulk gave him much more of a heroic undertaking and a rise to heroism as opposed to the more sloppy but action-packed reboot.

The science in Lee’s Hulk also gave the movie a bit more grounding and something for viewers to hold on to in relating to the character as opposed to simply rooting for the Hulk simply because he was the Hulk.
- Applerod
  
  I agree and really don’t think Ang Lee’s version was the huge embarrassing disastrous failure that everyone else apparently does. I guess the “problem” is that it didn’t give the audience “Hulk SMASH!!” in the first 10 minutes, instead substituting more of a meditative, artful approach to the character. I quite enjoyed the film — particularly the editing style. It had its shortcomings (sap; Nick Nolte clearly on blow; etc..), but the so-called “reboot” needs a reboot because quality-wise I consider it marginally inferior to its predecessor.
- Joeleo
  
  I did like some aspects of the first Hulk movie, it had some good effects and I will give Lee credit for trying to give it a comic book feel with the split panels and whatnot, but I thought the casting was abysmal. In other movies I like Nolte, Bana (was great in Star Trek for example) and Connelly but thought they all failed in this movie. And I think Lee was probably never a comic book fan, and it showed. I do have the dvd and watch it occasionally but The Incredible Hulk got closer to the source material and did things right
  - http://www.gamingblend.com/ William Usher
    
    Well, getting close to source material doesn’t always equate to a better movie, maybe for fanboys (not meant in a derogatory way) but for average movie goers a more accessible film is usually a better film and Ang Lee’s Hulk was more accessible from a story and character development standpoint.
    
    Let’s take Punisher: Warzone for example, that was closer to the source material but man was that a horrible, horrible movie. The plot was silly, the characterization was awful, the action was goofy (swinging upside down on the chandelier? Really?) and the gore was over-excessive in a campy, B-movie way. While Thomas Jane’s Punisher wasn’t as close to the source material it was a better overall movie in terms of story, character development and continuity, which is why it ages better than Punisher: Warzone.
    
    I do agree about the casting for Ang Lee’s Hulk and that they could have done a better job (except for Connelly, but I’d pretty much watch anything she’s in).
jsmith0552

I agree with every film on in this article with the exception of the Abram’s Star Trek film. That film looked for all the world like a person who was given a character sheet and then pasted them onto a generic Hollywood action Sci-Fi film. I expect a little more from Star Trek than a summer pop corn action flick. People still reference Wrath of Khan because it was well written and multi-layered while Abram’s Star Trek is pretty much forgotten after four years.
http://twitter.com/MinimeJer05 Jeremy Lebens

Fantastic write up. I especially enjoyed the Stark Trek and Apes pages, because those were the most surprising or ones that I thought for sure were going to suck or be lesser than previously established properties.
james

“Abrams captured much of what makes Star Trek special – the optimistic vision of the future, mankind’s symbiotic relationship with technology, strategy-based warfare, etc.”

I’m sorry, but what Trek did you watch? There was nothing optimistic about it, no sense of exploration into the unknown, it was a Star Wars movie coated with Trek characters. The only thing it had in respect to the original was the cheesy mainstream lines that non-trek fans merely assumed was in it.
- http://www.facebook.com/angie.barrows.5 Angie Barrows
  
  I agree.
  
  “… the Star Trek universe we know and love changed into something
  fresh, original, and utterly unpredictable. … it felt profoundly disorientating to see recognizable versions of Kirk, Scott, McCoy, and the other classic characters thrust into a situation where we could not be sure, even for a second, of their fate. With continuity swept away in a massive black hole, these characters were dynamic again, their story relevant and engrossing once more.”
  
  How is it the Trek universe with the characters we know and love if everything is changed or original and you don’t know what to expect because everyone and everything is “utterly unpredictable?” Keeping a few recognizable elements but changing all of the rest isn’t enough familiarity for me to call it the Star Trek I know and love.
  
  “They chose to … blow the whole damn thing up.”
  
  Exactly.
  - http://www.facebook.com/npu3pagg Aleksey Highlander
    
    i hate original Star track so freaking much.. the uniforms are so gay, most of the stories are so boring and to finish it of acting is poor ass.. Babylon 5 thats the classic sci-phy! no cheesy shit in it! but hte new movie of star track wasn’t bad at alll !!! fresh, new. something different. some proper action. no gay interactions and gay uniforms!
Zachariah Dearing

Why isn’t Amazing Spiderman on the list?
- …..
  
  Because it was an unnecesary movie, that doesnt have any reason to exist.. other than Sony keeping the rigths, and the casting is off, all the things it did rigth were done better by the Original Spiderman
lunasgathering

I agree with the comment that motion capture should be counted as ‘real’ acting. Andy Serkis should easily have an Oscar for some of the amazing performances he’s turned in through motion capture. Gollum and the Ape are proof enough of that.
ace13

Casino Royale was Boring.