Anyone else tired of nostalgia-based entertainment?

These days it seems like so much of our popular media is simply remakes of previous works. I really don't think this is a "kids get off my lawn!!" issue because if you think about it, it's really unprecedented. Yes I'm a kid of the 80's - and most of the media we had back then was new properties. I could list a bunch of stuff but you guys know the score - Transformers, Ghostbusters, Ninja Turtles, Star Wars, etc etc etc.

So much of the popular media now is simply reworks of what has come before. Has there ever been an era that had so many remakes of IPs that used to be strictly for children's consumption?

I used to enjoy many of these things, from Ghostbusters to GI Joe to Transformers to Star Wars to Batman, ad nauseum. But these days I feel like I'm in the minority, I am bored with the characters of my childhood and teen years, I don't want to see reimaginings and high definition 3D presentations of ideas that are 20-40 years old! One of my best friends from high school, he was so into Star Wars that he practically indoctrinated his son to liking this stuff. I guess this is the nerd version of indoctrinating your son to love the local sports team?

It all just seems so stuck in the past. Even when a relatively new property emerges that becomes popular, say Firefly for example, it simply spawns another cult that can't let go, ten plus years later.

Where is the hunger for the new? Where is the fatigue for the old? I mean, Batman was a great character. We've seen so many interpretations of him. But when are we ready to say, that's enough, let's get some closure and move on?

I don't know. It's not something that I worry too much about, but then there's stuff like Star Trek Into Darkness and Batman Arkham Knight that are just rehashes of old entertainment, rejiggered to play on our prior knowledge without adding anything new to the equation (though, now that I throw Arkham Knight out there, I realize it's only the main mystery that this applies to).

Hannibal has had a similar problem for me, where it seems to change things just to change them (specifically with the first season). The second season fixed a lot of that, by outright subverting expectations, but even early season three undermines that!

There are times, like with the Mortal Kombat short film or the Power Rangers one by Joseph Khan that they actually capture my imagination, but most of the time they end up being subpar and not really exploring anything new.

So I guess, now that I've worked it out in this post, that I am getting tired of it. There are times when I'm intrigued (like the sequel to Mirrors Edge), but one of the things you have to remember is that at one point all of these things is that they started out at an original idea (like Ghostbusters, which is now going to be an all-female cast) that got played out. I guess the question really is at what point do they become played out and tired.

AcidCat wrote:

Batman was a great character. We've seen so many interpretations of him. But when are we ready to say, that's enough, let's get some closure and move on?

One of the things I really wish they'd go back to is limited stories that don't keep the characters around for years and years, circling each other and never moving anywhere. It's one of the big issues with the New 52, is that they were supposed to restart all the stories, with roughly five years experience each, but even Damien was (around) eight years old, so why would Bruce have had an affair with Talia when he wasn't the Bat?

Sorry, it's easy to get bogged down in all the history and the what ifs when they're supposed to be wiping them clean and then straight up ignoring that.

Long story short, I think it'd be helpful to introduce one-off villains, maybe keep the myth of the Bat going, but develop it as it goes on. I don't know. It's an interesting discussion.

Hmmmm. I can't say as I am tired of it. I actually enjoyed all of the Transformer movies (except Age of Extinction), and the GI Joe first movie. I also enjoyed the TMNT movie and look forward to the sequel (I have been told that I don't have good taste in movies). as far as gaming is concerned, I like more recent properties: Dragon's Age, Mass Effect, and Saints Row are some of my all-time favorites. I have no desire to go back in time to do prequels (Borderlands and Gears of War) or extend stories that happened ages ago. I can't tell you why it's this way. I recently played Dragon's Lair all the way through for all of the achievements but it's not like I had to put alot of effort in it, or that I would play a sequel if one ever came out.

I can say that if the game play varies very little then I can't get into it. Assassin's Creed is an example. I have played some here and there but its the same basic game with little change. Dragon's Age changed from Tactical RPG to Action RPG to some hybrid inbetween. So maybe if Dragon's Lair II came out and it suddenly offered a new way to play the character I might be into it. But if the game mechanic is the same as it was way back when, I have no desire to play again.

Wow. I hope that rambling made any kind of sense.

I guess Story is paramount to me, along with change.

I think I see it mostly as a sign that we've now explored so many ideas in our media, especially as production technology radically advanced in the 90s an 00s, that the rate of production studios need to survive financially exceeds the human brain's creativity.

This combined with economic factors making studios risk adverse drives them to retry the old things that worked, lure in nostalgic parents who will often want to share those experiences with their children, etc.

I'm a bit weary of it but I've also accepted that this is just going to be the model for a while now.

There's not actually that many different stories to tell, just variations on a few themes. So I don't think it's inherently all that bad that we'll being Spiderman's origin story for like the seventh time on the big screen. But I think there is a problem when creators aren't bringing anything new to a story, when it's mainly just references to the original.

AcidCat wrote:

Yes I'm a kid of the 80's - and most of the media we had back then was new properties. I could list a bunch of stuff but you guys know the score - Transformers, Ghostbusters, Ninja Turtles, Star Wars, etc etc etc.

Although I agree with your main point, I though both Ghostbusters and Star Wars were supposed to be nostalgic throwbacks in the eighties.

Danjo Olivaw wrote:
AcidCat wrote:

Yes I'm a kid of the 80's - and most of the media we had back then was new properties. I could list a bunch of stuff but you guys know the score - Transformers, Ghostbusters, Ninja Turtles, Star Wars, etc etc etc.

Although I agree with your main point, I though both Ghostbusters and Star Wars were supposed to be nostalgic throwbacks in the eighties.

Throwbacks to what exactly? Pretty sure they were both firsts. Although star wars is actually 70's as it came out in '77.

Big Studio is too afraid to gamble on new IP's, based on recent poor performances. Given astronomically high production costs it prefers safe, derivative sequels that are easy to justify to investors, less risk and all that.

YES, so much so! Every new re-boot announcement that comes out anymore makes me frustrated. I get that this is not a new phenomenon, but it does seem to be at a peak. Some of it's not terrible, or even good in the case of Batman and Star Trek (in my opinion), but I'm just craving something new. I just get the sense that my generation (30-40 age group) must be a big target market right now and the only thing they know how to sell to us is nostalgia. Maybe as Netflix and home release entertainment becomes more prevalent producers will be more willing to take risks -- it seems like that's where creativity is coming back so far.

DiscoDriveby wrote:

YES, so much so! Every new re-boot announcement that comes out anymore makes me frustrated. I get that this is not a new phenomenon, but it does seem to be at a peak. Some of it's not terrible, or even good in the case of Batman and Star Trek (in my opinion), but I'm just craving something new. I just get the sense that my generation (30-40 age group) must be a big target market right now and the only thing they know how to sell to us is nostalgia. Maybe as Netflix and home release entertainment becomes more prevalent producers will be more willing to take risks -- it seems like that's where creativity is coming back so far.

I feel the same way. This makes me a bit curious, because I can't recall the studios pulling the same trick on our parents' during their prime years. Maybe we're the first generation that isn't embarrassed to still be attached to the things we grew up with. Maybe our childhood materials just lend much better to reboots. Maybe the studios finally feel like they got the reboot formula down enough to effect predictable results. It could be the perfect storm of all three and more.

I don't mind this, though. I think there's enough mix of the old and new for everyone out there. There's nothing wrong with the occasional trip down the memory lane, and it's fun to see old franchises taking on new lives. What I can't stand is the people who are particularly protective of their nostalgia, jealously holding onto fragments of their childhood memories like they're some sort of sacred text. You know, like this guy.

It's always been a problem with movies and music. Everyone does remakes or covers. It's just happening more with video games now too. And the frequency of movies seems to have increased. Not even a decade since the crappy Fantastic Four movies, and another complete reboot is out this week.

Tired of its existence? Not really. Thankfully, nobody is making me watch it.

I don't mind sequels and remakes of good nostalgic things. They had quality and maybe some of that quality can be recaptured. But just because I fondly remember a time when I watched Full House does NOT mean that I will watch Fuller House.

I am nostalgic for new ideas.

DiscoDriveby wrote:

I just get the sense that my generation (30-40 age group) must be a big target market right now and the only thing they know how to sell to us is nostalgia.

It creeps in from all angles. Hearing New Order or Duran Duran from the overhead speakers at my local Giant supermarket. Hearing Ozzy's "All aboard!!!" Crazy Train intro at the kickoff of virtually every NFL game. 80's toys (He-Man, Stretch Arrmstrong) featured in recent car commercials. It's crazy.

But I really noticed that at Target over the weekend. I was looking for a local-team ball cap and I noticed an entire section of novelty t-shirts that were nothing but 70's-80's nostalgia. Metallica, Star Wars, Pink Floyd, Transformers, etc.

Hell, the men's boxers section right next to it was even worse! So much so that I had to take a pic.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/5tYzVFD.jpg?1)

Yeeks!

The only thing I'm left wondering is when our gen will be left behind in favor of a younger demographic willing to spend more than adults who grew up in the 70's/80's. Targeting us has to dry up at some point. I'm pretty okay with that, minus the occasional wistful nostalgia.

Honestly? No. Not really.

I just see the things I'm interested in and don't see the things I'm not.

Doesn't hurt me either way.

Nostalgia sells, which means companies are more likely to underwrite new material on old properties.

We can talk about how copyright allowed companies to retain properties and now are flagellating those properties for profit.

There's still a ton of new stuff out there, but if all you're seeing is Star Wars everywhere well ... you may be right on that one.

Thin_J wrote:

Honestly? No. Not really.

I just see the things I'm interested in and don't see the things I'm not.

Doesn't hurt me either way.

Yeah, there's more entertainment than I will ever consume. Makes it easy to pick and choose the quality, whether it's new or a remake of something older.

For me with stuff that's getting remade I'm often not familiar with the original either, so it's still new.

*edit*

I will add though, that folks of a nerdy persuasion seem to love having their childhood recalled, so a lot of the over exposure to nostalgic media probably comes as a result of things like hanging around an adult video game forum and reading geek focussed media.

I'm not into most common things like Star Wars, Marvel, Star Trek, Doctor Who, many of the popular things that have come back. Not only do I not have time, but I feel like as a kid, I would've gotten into this stuff already if there was something for me. I tire of a lot of things like these sticking around simply because I'm not into them, and I'd love for more new things to come to the light of day and get some exposure - not to say that this hasn't happened either.

It just seems like I almost can't go see an action movie without it being based on something, notably things within the subject matter here. So, I don't go see movies 90% of the time. Just no interest.

But, food for thought - music is kind of the same way, at least popular music. Why is Britney Spears still selling tons and tons and tons of song downloads? I understand that 'legends' stick around, but if you're not a 'legend', how or why does a 'comeback' work? Is it the scenario where people just love watching the car wreck too much to look away even after all this time?

Hell, Salt 'N Pepa even came back thanks to some commercials, and re-recorded an entire album, or something. Not really trying to say "your music choices suck" if you like them, but why them, and why now?

Yellek wrote:
Danjo Olivaw wrote:

Although I agree with your main point, I though both Ghostbusters and Star Wars were supposed to be nostalgic throwbacks in the eighties.

Throwbacks to what exactly? Pretty sure they were both firsts. Although star wars is actually 70's as it came out in '77.

Spookbusters and serials like Flash Gordon. They live comfortably between new IP and ripoff. A purposeful pastiche modified with elements from other sources as well. I lump in Star Wars because AcidCat included it, and I think the original trilogy went into the 80's. I dunno, I was busy learning to walk.

If something is executed really well, and also isn't just downright formulaic, I'm not bothered if it's homage, pastiche, sequel, reboot, whatever. It's just that usually 90% of everything is crap, regardless of medium or level of originality.

What will 90's nostalgia look like? I wasn't really paying attention and Portlandia is a little too provincial to speak for the whole decade.

For me (being 27) 90's Nostalgia already exists, and admittedly, it's the basis of some of the things I like about video games, to a certain respect. I think that generally, 90's Nostalgia is being marketed a little, but nowhere near as much as these other decades of nostalgia. A lot of 90's nostalgia is a blend of newer-age 80's stuff, with things like Nickelodeon, Super Nintendo, weird and experimental toys, obnoxious colors, and a huge influx of music videos, 'x-treme' branding and sunglasses everywhere. I think nostalgia for kids of the 90's also only goes as early as cassette tapes, which at that time were seriously on the decline as an audio format. (This may be why I find vinyl so interesting, because it wasn't something I dealt with much, aside from a few my dad happened to have when I was young.)

I can't really see any of those things (for the most part) being something people would continuously market and push in the future like the main ones we've seen here, though. Some of the more popular Nickelodeon shows were already collected and put on DVD through what looked like a rip from VHS (cheaply), Super Nintendo gets lumped in with 'retro gaming', toys will always circle back around somewhat, but the market for that isn't as big obviously. Music videos are still around but are as hidden as ever, and the rest seems kind of kitschy. I don't know that the 90's had anything radically different than the 80's, but like a more polished version of the 80's... or something.

This excerpt from Laura Hudson's review of Armada by Ernest Cline does a hell of a job articulating how I feel about this:

Laura Hudson wrote:

Our fantasies can tell us a great deal about ourselves, and the fact that Cline's work has often been trumpeted as the ultimate “nerdgasm” or some sort of apotheosis of nerd culture should be troubling to anyone who identifies with the label. There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, on its own; our love for the media of our youth—and more importantly, for the qualities that made us love it in the first place—is not only worth remembering, but also capable of sparking new and wonderful creations, so long as we are able to distinguish inspiration from imitation.

It's a valuable question for gaming culture—and “nerd culture” more generally—to ask itself: Do we want to tell stories that make sense of the things we used to love, that help us remember the reasons we were so drawn to them, and create new works that inspire that level of devotion? Or do we simply want to hear the litany of our childhood repeated back to us like an endless lullaby for the rest of our lives?

That aside, I'm not strictly speaking tired of it. The most egregious examples don't tend to be the type of thing I get into. And there's room for both kinds, I figure.

(Thanks to Austin Walker on the Giant Beastcast for being the reason I read that review.)

But this nostalgia-based entertainment of today is bringing back The X-Files and Evil Dead. How could I possibly be tired of that?

Nightmare on Elm Street, just rebooted in 2010, is getting rebooted again.

And also:

Nightmare is not alone in getting an up-to-date reboot. Dimension’s Halloween Returns, directed by Marcus Dunstan, is due out next year; David Bruckner directs Platinum Dunes’ Friday the 13th sequel which is scripted by Nick Antosca and also due in 2016; and Lionsgate’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre prequel titled Leatherface is already cast and on track for a 2016 release.

I miss the good ol' days when everything was new.

I think the nostalgia factor is a totally normal thing that happens throughout history, we're just a lot more aware of it now because we're a lot more connected. Batman is almost an American mythological character. As is Kirk, Buffy, the Ghostbusters, etc.

That said, I think it does get frustrating when you're trying to bring new IP into the world and you have a hard time even getting pitch meetings despite seeing really poorly made recycled stuff over and over and cries for new, interesting worlds / characters / etc. from every critic out there... And then those same critics are praising and feeding the excitement / hunger for the reboots that they later pan and OH DEAR GOD WHY CREATE ANYTHING EVER.

...

Sorry. I blacked out for a sec. What was I saying?

Quintin_Stone wrote:

I miss the good ol' days when everything was new.

What, at the Big Bang?

f*ck you're old.

The problem with nostalgia based entertainment is that (in general) we had really sh*tty taste in entertainment when we were kids.

Laura Hudson wrote:

Our fantasies can tell us a great deal about ourselves, and the fact that Cline's work has often been trumpeted as the ultimate “nerdgasm” or some sort of apotheosis of nerd culture should be troubling to anyone who identifies with the label. There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, on its own; our love for the media of our youth—and more importantly, for the qualities that made us love it in the first place—is not only worth remembering, but also capable of sparking new and wonderful creations, so long as we are able to distinguish inspiration from imitation.

It's a valuable question for gaming culture—and “nerd culture” more generally—to ask itself: Do we want to tell stories that make sense of the things we used to love, that help us remember the reasons we were so drawn to them, and create new works that inspire that level of devotion? Or do we simply want to hear the litany of our childhood repeated back to us like an endless lullaby for the rest of our lives?

SARCASM ALERT

Ooh! I have a choice between option 1 and option 2! I wonder which one I should pick! Let's see. She appears to be doing an "IMITATION BAD!" bit on Option 2, so I'd better not choose that one. I'll choose Option 1 because, obviously, there's only one right way left to judge everything.

END SARCASM ALERT

Perhaps a more enlightening question: Should we define our own personal value of entertainment based on our own complex experiences and tastes? Or do we simply want to define it based on someone else's criteria?

(I totally understand and respect that there are folks who agree with the quote above based on their own reasons, and that's what the quote was used to illustrate. However, I disagree with the way the quote assumes that everyone can apply these concepts in the same way from a universally shared perspective which does not exist.)

Did you just use a bunch of words to bring out the old "everything is subjective" conversation-ender?