(no subject)
Nov. 24th, 2010 12:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatPosting during lunch break - too cold to walk, and foot's been bugging me off and on, so giving it a rest - since I need to walk about 20 minutes to get to the ferry tomorrow. Going to the Poconos again for Thanksgiving, or rather slightly south east of the Poconos. Visiting the Aunts. So will be thankfully offline and away from the internet for the duration - should you miss me, that is. Considering I've been in a right funky posting mood of late, I somehow doubt it. Work, life, the universe and everything...won't bore with details.
Read all about the reboots/sequels/remakes of movies and tv shows in the paper and online this week. To date:
Tron 2 - The Legacy. Can't imagine many people will see this sequel to the 1980s cult hit. At least I think it was 1980s. Interestingly enough - I saw it and enjoyed it at the time. (Sci-fi geek - I've pretty much seen all the sci-fi movies that weren't gross and gory and monster flicks. ie. the cult ones.)
The Tourist - a remake of the critically acclaimed but poorly received French film Arthur Zimmerman (I think - can't remember the title exactly.)
Let Me In (it's still out there somewhere) - a remake of the Swedish film, Let the Right One In.
The Buffy Reboot by Whit Anderson - which everyone who is still a big fan of Buffy and follows these things and is on my flist or associated with it, has commented on. Including every entertainment news feed out there, and everyone peripherially involved who could possibly have an opinon on it. Whedon's was hilarious - although 85% of the people who read it took it seriously. Proof that self-deprecating snark really does go over people's heads. Particularly when it has a grain of truth inside it. (Which if you aren't careful makes you sound more whiny than snarky. Whedon, in my opinion, was treading a very fine line between the two. That's the problem with off-the-cuff remarks - which I'm guessing his was, it can get misinterpreted. And unlike me, he can't just delete or retract it. Fame? Not all it's cracked up to be.)
I don't get the whole urge to remake, reboot crap. Sequels? Sure. But why re-do it? Is it this urge to make your own mark on it? To show people how you view the thing? Lots of things have been rebooted and remade of late: La Femme Nikita has been remade and rebooted at least four times (Alias, Nikita, Dollhouse, Covert Affairs.) X-Files? Seen lots and lots of versions of this one. They used to remake Hithcock films - I know, Why???? Do you really want to be compared to Hitchock? Shakespeare - I get, he's been dead over 200 years, and well was theater, people redo plays all the bloody time. But film is harder - because we get to look at the original for comparison.
Back to work.
Read all about the reboots/sequels/remakes of movies and tv shows in the paper and online this week. To date:
Tron 2 - The Legacy. Can't imagine many people will see this sequel to the 1980s cult hit. At least I think it was 1980s. Interestingly enough - I saw it and enjoyed it at the time. (Sci-fi geek - I've pretty much seen all the sci-fi movies that weren't gross and gory and monster flicks. ie. the cult ones.)
The Tourist - a remake of the critically acclaimed but poorly received French film Arthur Zimmerman (I think - can't remember the title exactly.)
Let Me In (it's still out there somewhere) - a remake of the Swedish film, Let the Right One In.
The Buffy Reboot by Whit Anderson - which everyone who is still a big fan of Buffy and follows these things and is on my flist or associated with it, has commented on. Including every entertainment news feed out there, and everyone peripherially involved who could possibly have an opinon on it. Whedon's was hilarious - although 85% of the people who read it took it seriously. Proof that self-deprecating snark really does go over people's heads. Particularly when it has a grain of truth inside it. (Which if you aren't careful makes you sound more whiny than snarky. Whedon, in my opinion, was treading a very fine line between the two. That's the problem with off-the-cuff remarks - which I'm guessing his was, it can get misinterpreted. And unlike me, he can't just delete or retract it. Fame? Not all it's cracked up to be.)
I don't get the whole urge to remake, reboot crap. Sequels? Sure. But why re-do it? Is it this urge to make your own mark on it? To show people how you view the thing? Lots of things have been rebooted and remade of late: La Femme Nikita has been remade and rebooted at least four times (Alias, Nikita, Dollhouse, Covert Affairs.) X-Files? Seen lots and lots of versions of this one. They used to remake Hithcock films - I know, Why???? Do you really want to be compared to Hitchock? Shakespeare - I get, he's been dead over 200 years, and well was theater, people redo plays all the bloody time. But film is harder - because we get to look at the original for comparison.
Back to work.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-11-24 11:47 pm (UTC)(I swear I saw the Buffy movie in the mid-1990s (in Lawrence, KS), and I was in my late 20s, and Whedon is three - five years older than me. )
I'm guessing it's not a remake but a reboot. That means - they are just using the idea of Buffy as a vampire slayer and a watcher, and just making it happen later. Dumping everything else.
would find that their copyright will end if they don't do something new with it... so they sold it to Warner Bros.
I think you are confusing trademark law with copyright law. Copyright doesn't end if you don't do anything with it. It will continue past death. You own it - you own it until you sell it.
Unless there's a clause in the contract stating otherwise...but we have no way of knowing that. (That stuff is kept confidential). Trademarks on the other hand - you have to keep using as your brand name or it will end. Same with domain names (internet urls are domain names).
So, no, they didn't have to do it for that reason. No, I think they did it to make money.
I think WB thinks they can churn out a fast cheap film to cash in on the vampire (Twilight, True Blood, etc) craze...
Yep. I completely agree. I swear the vampire genre has been done to death now. There's nothing new that can be said about it. It's rapidly moving towards cliche.