So, we've all read it and cringed:
"A reimagining"
"A reboot"
"A redefining"
"A retread"
RE-RE-RE-RE....remember when people just told a cool story?
It's not uncommon for Hollywood to return to old themes or ideas - that's been going on for as long as there has been a movie industry. But the idea of taking specific characters and changing part of their story because they weren't "cool" enough in the first place seems relatively new.
"We're gonna do SUPERMAN, but he needs to be cooler. Edgier." Rather than focus on what works about the character and writing a good story with those elements, they ignore everything about it, focusing just on the brand recognition.
One only need to look as far as the Twilight novels to see how popular culture has started a trend of gutting character arch types that we know for drastically different (and counter to the core of the character) interpretations.
So it begs the question. Who owns these characters? Does it go beyond the legal ownership and licensing rights to a greater sense of ownership by those who hold these characters dear to their hearts? George Lucas constantly redefines the most popular series of films in history. Are they truly "his"? Or are they owned, in part, by those of us who feel they are part of the fabric of our culture?
No comments:
Post a Comment