Does Branding A Reboot Hurt The Product?

[Alex]

And by that I mean when a film or game series is rebooted and given a different twist but given the brand name to try and sell better.

Example I bought DMC: Devil May Cry the rebooted version of the Devil May Cry franchise. I like it, combat is good and so is the platforming and the storyline is interesting. I wouldn't call it a Devil May Cry game though. Sure there are similar elements but to me it seems like something trying to be Devil May Cry. I pesonally felt if they'd called it something else (Angels & Demons Die or whatever) and branded as from the people that brought you Devil May Cry but different it might have been better recieved.

Similarly there are various rebooted films which seem if they had been called something else might have been better recieved. The 2011 Conan film I heard was eh as a Conan film but seemed alright as a standard fantasy film, similarly the Evil Dead reboot is really good but I heard people were skeptical because A. it didn't have the Ash character/Bruce Campbell in it or the wacky craziness of the original films.


I mean I know there are good reboots. The Prince Of Persia Sand Of Time trilogy is a good example of a game reboot done well and films like Dredd have done better in staying closer to the source material and the rebooted Star Trek is doing their own spin while also staying true to the original but do you reckon with trying to go with a familiar name that people know are companies actually hurting their chances instead of trying to market these ideas as new? (even though they technically aren't)

 

[Mitch Henessey]

A. it didn't have the Ash character/Bruce Campbell in it

I know this is a real stretch, and his appearance is a VERY brief cameo, but Campbell pops up in a post-credits scene.

To answer the question, it's a roll of the dice for a number of reasons. Times change, and you never know how fans and critics will react to a complete overhaul or changes to the original films or the source material.

Evil Dead 2013 is a great example. I LOVE 80’s horror, and I love Evil Dead ’81 and ’87 (I’ve always been indifferent to Army Of Darkness), but there’s no way they could maintain the same style, humor, and comedic tone in all three films, and expect the 2013 film to be a success now a days. There’s no way around it. For starters, marketing the film would’ve been a tricky pain in the ass, because there’s no way to tell how people would react to the trailers and commercials. There’s a slight chance for a nostalgic 80’s horror throwback approach working, but there’s no real guarantee.

Personally, I loved Evil Dead 2013. It was a darker film with more graphic bloody gore, Jane Levy was outstanding in the leading role, and Fede Alvarez’s work behind the camera was impressive.

Although, on the flip-side of that, you’ll have a case, where taking a chance to try something different horribly backfires. They tried to make a more serious horror film with the 2010 Elm Street remake, and the end result was a big misfire.