Enough with all the remakes!

[TMC]

http://nypost.com/2015/10/20/enough-...he-tv-reboots/

There have been so many reboot announcements lately that even the Gilmore Girls revival wasn’t exciting.

[Zoneboy]

The Internet had a collective freak-out Monday over the news that Netflix has reportedly closed a deal to revive “Gilmore Girls” as a limited series — bringing the mother-daughter duo of Lauren Graham and Alexis Bledel back to TV (the show was canceled in 2007).

As a millennial woman who grew up a fervent fan of The WB drama, I should have met this news with jubilation. Instead I met it with a “meh” shrug.

TV is suffering from an acute case of reboot fatigue. Somewhere along the way of reviving “Arrested Development,” “Fuller House,” “Girl Meets World,” “24: Live Another Day,” “Heroes Reborn,” “The X-Files” and “Twin Peaks” (among others), beloved TV shows coming back from the dead stopped being special — and started becoming commonplace.

While part of me is in favor of any project that gives Graham a chance to correct her egregious missing Emmy for playing the quick-witted Lorelai Gilmore (who turned banter into an Olympic sport), a greater part of me wishes that TV could let the past stay just that.

What would the Stars Hollow of “Gilmore Girls” even look like a decade later? The quaint Luke’s Diner would surely have been franchised as a Starbucks by now. Perhaps Rory’s (Bledel) dreams of being a serious political journalist have given way to a listicle-writing job at a branded content agency. Maybe Lorelai is struggling to keep the Dragonfly Inn afloat against the onslaught of Airbnb.

To be sure, there are plenty of business reasons having to do with industry buzzwords like “peak TV” and “brand recognition” for networks and studios to want to revive once-popular shows. But from a purely creative standpoint, does that mean we have to squeeze every iteration out of them? Is nothing in TV sacred anymore?

Recent reboot attempts have not even been that successful. The fourth season of “Arrested Development” was met with uneven reviews (the cast’s subsequent fame created significant structural challenges for the Netflix version). The “24” sequel failed to approach the heights of its post-9/11-era viewership (ditto for this fall’s “Heroes Reborn”).

Part of this is because nostalgia is a tricky thing to replicate. TV shows — especially those that originally aired in the pre-DVR era — are often directly associated with a specific time in your life, when you sat down to watch at the same time every week with your mother, friends, roommates, etc. Our memories and feelings around these shows sometimes have as much to do with their quality as with how we related to them at the time.

In that context, sequels will almost always fail to live up to expectations viewed through rose-tinted glasses.

Perhaps the best reason for doing away with reboots is that in today’s on-demand entertainment, TV shows never truly go away. If I’m missing the world of Stars Hollow — or any or my favorite ’90s series — I just queue up my Netflix or Hulu or Amazon Prime. The truly great shows stand the test of time — with “Friends,” “Seinfeld,” “The West Wing” and “Lost” continuing to pick up new generations of fans through their original episodes streaming online (and, in the case of “Friends” and “Seinfeld,” airing in syndication seemingly 24/7).

Growing up is inevitable. Is it so bad to want the TV characters of my youth to remain perfectly preserved in time?

[Regulus]

It shows that the entertainment industry is in such a sad state. It's like they have run out of ideas.

[Vahan]

Hollywood has been doing remakes since day one.

[Steve_uk]

Are there any remakes which are better than the original?

[mets82]

I think certain shows are ok with remakes. Gilmore Girls being an example of that.

[JamesG]

Originally Posted by Steve_uk

Are there any remakes which are better than the original?

I personally thought that Syfy's "Battlestar Galactica" was way better than the original and 80s version. Opinions vary, of course.

[TMC]

A "Cruel Intentions" TV show is the latest unnecessary Hollywood reboot. http://MAXIMM.AG/v8lnFBU

[Mr. Television]

Originally Posted by Steve_uk

Are there any remakes which are better than the original?

I do like Hawaii Five-O. I wouldn't say it's better though.

[Regulus]

Originally Posted by Steve_uk

Are there any remakes which are better than the original?

In the movie department, only twice in my life.

1993 Homeward Bound, The Incredible Journey (Remake of the 1960 The Incredible Journey) The original was a narrated story about two dogs and a cat who go across the wilderness to reach their masters. For the remake Disney (who made the original as well) decided to make the remake a comedy, and made characters of the animals and made them talk (Sally Fields was the voice of the cat while Don Ameche and Micheal J Fox played the voices of the dogs.

2006 Charlotte's Web (Remake of the 1973 Animated movie) The first one, put out by Hanna-Barbera was rather mediocre, and it was a pushover when the 2006 movie came out

BTW I have all four of these on DVD

[tenter]

It seems that remakes of old shows sitcoms/dramas tells that creator or staff are running out of ideas to create own show.
First it was Full House revival (now titled Fuller House), A-Team, Coach (although production was called off before it even started) And now Gilmore Girls?