Reboots and reunions: do we really need to keep returning to the past?

#Throwback, etc.

Earlier this year, it was announced that Disney+ has plans to reboot the original Home Alone.  The response was - to the say the least - mixed as fans and general enjoyers of Christmas pondered whether the reboot would be at all worth their time or, indeed, good at all. The discussion only continued today as the cast of the upcoming film was announced, and while bagging talents like Rob Delaney, Archie Yates, Ellie Kemper is undoubtedly impressive, the entire concept of another Home Alone movie just doesn't seem to sit well with people. Mainly because if there's one thing we don't need, it's another Home Alone movie. This year alone, we've been accosted with news of allegedly upcoming reboots and reunions for Friends, Lizzie Maguire, Gossip Girl, Clueless, Party of Five, Saved By The Bell, Footballers' Wives (thanks Rebekah Vardy), and Revenge.  And that's just in the past six months. The above doesn't even include the abundance of live action reboots that have arisen over the past while. We're talking the live action Lion King, the live action Lady and the Tramp, the live action Little Mermaid, the live action Dora the Explorer and, for some desperately unknown reason, the live action Barney.  Because everybody needs to see a true-to-life large purple dinosaur from their childhood on the big screen. The problem with the reboot is not just that we've already heard all of these stories before (and trust me, we have), but that they're creeping into coveted space that otherwise original movies and TV shows could be taking. Every year, a survey of the "most liked" Hollywood screenplays that haven't been produced yet is published. Comprised of more than 1,000 screenplays, the Black List has become less of a lamentation of the movies that could have been and more of a means of drawing attention to incredible stories that need to be told. Almost one third of the screenplays added to the list since 2005 have since been successfully produced, but the list's very existence proves the abundance of gripping, well-written, and original movies that are still missing out on being made. And sure, all of this can't be blamed on the prevalence of the reboot. There's other factors at play here like timings, profitability, and the fact that sometimes, screenplays just aren't meant to make it to the big screen. But surely a whole load of these screenplays have far more chance of success than a vaguely thought-out reboot with a plot that doesn't really translate all that well in 2019? And surely audiences are more interested in new stories than the same old crap? But movies aren't even the main culprit when it comes to the reboot. While live actions remakes are never as good as their original cartoonish counterparts (never), TV shows really take the biscuit when it comes to poor plots - and downright laziness. At this point, it almost seems as if every vaguely popular TV show broadcast before 2006 is getting itself a tasty re-entry into the pop culture sphere. And sure, some of them might be worth a shout. Although technically not a reboot, the new Sabrina series is almost on its third season. 90210 was actually decent enough. The Gilmore Girls Netflix specials weren't totally awful (maybe). But apart from that, nah. Nothing of note. No show that has made any kind of impact, provided something new, or done anything other than make people say: "Aw, remember that? I used to love that" wistfully, before moving on with their lives. The obvious exception to this is Doctor Who, a series that has arguably gotten only better since it returned to our screens in 2005. But Doctor Who is different. It was rebooted because it had more stories to tell and better technology available to tell them with. It didn't just rely on old plots, vaguely willing-to-return cast members, and the promise of shared memory. For years, the very concept of a Friends reunion was shut down. Cast members and creators alike quelled the rumours for what seemed like an age until finally, suddenly, for reasons unbeknownst to many, it was announced that the reunion was, indeed, in the works.  And while the avid Friends fans among us cheered with delight - and people like me will obviously still be watching - is it really necessary that we find out exactly where Rachel and Ross are now, marvel at how old everybody has gotten, while listening to stilted jokes that simply won't be funny anymore? The reboot and the reunion both have their purposes - and they fulfil them quite well. They answer questions, they cause us to reminisce. They're essentially fanbait that exists only to make a very small group of people happy - and make a whole lot of money. But when original ideas are rarely rewarded and nostalgia continues to make the big bucks, what else are we to do? Other than settle down, suck it up, and wait for the next unnecessary reunion featuring cast members who don't want to be there, and the next reboot re-telling a story that nobody wants to hear. (Except for the Gavin & Stacey special, that is. That'll be great.)