Disney Talking ‘Pirates Of The Caribbean’ Reboot With ‘Deadpool’ Scribes Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick

[Wheels]

Yes they do. In the right kind of projects. Will Smith in an Aladdin or Bad Boys certainly helps open those. Leonardo DiCaprio in pretty much anything. Tom Cruise in a Mission Impossible.

Two star vehicles from the 90s (one based on an old TV show) and a remake of a Renaissance Era Disney film doesn't make your point. Hell, it doesn't have to be from that that era even as generally Disney live action remakes make money. What big financial hit does Leo have since Inception? That was years ago and was Nolan at his peak popularity.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

I’d you think about it, Dead Men Tell No Tales is a reboot of sorts introducing Will & Elizabeth’s son and Barbosa’s daughter to continue the franchise. Of course you can still have Captain Jack in a large supporting role and perhaps feature cameos from Will & Elizabeth to add some continuity

Just add Karen Gillan to the mix if they’re really set on having her star in a POTC movie. I can see her playing the popular red head pirate in the ride

 

[Wheels]

I'm not for the reboot really but it doesn't bother me at the same time.
I hate how deluted the term reboot is now. Sequels, remakes, reboots, and requels are very specific things. No film that has Captain Jack as played by Johnny Depp is a damn reboot no matter how many years has passed, so please stop saying reboot when talking about films that are sequels to some films in the previous version of a property. Don't call a remake a freaking reboot either. Sorry not talking about anyone here, but some people don't know what a reboot is. Especially people in media.

 

[Silvermoth]

I wonder who they’ll get to direct? I feel like they’ll be looking for someone from the House of Marvel I reckon. Just a vibe

 

[Teelie]

Don't care what you guys think. Giving Karen Gillan a chance at being in a Pirates movie sounds worthwhile. It's going in a different direction but it needs to without Depp.

 

[Wheels]

I have nothing against this particular direction if Disney insists on doing another one. It's not like the sequels mean anything to me so I'm not against watching one of these without Jack. My thing is that I could go about a decade without seing a new Pirates film before I'd be hoping for a reboot. If they are going to do it then this is not a bad way to go for me because going with Karen Gillan is appealing, how ever slightly that might be.

 

[Albright]

If it‘s announced now, then it will be released probably 24/25
Thats 8 years after the last one, which makes it almost a decade

 

[DarkKnight88]

Two star vehicles from the 90s (one based on an old TV show) and a remake of a Renaissance Era Disney film doesn't make your point. Hell, it doesn't have to be from that that era even as generally Disney live action remakes make money. What big financial hit does Leo have since Inception? That was years ago and was Nolan at his peak popularity.

Is this a joke about Leo?

Django Unchained, The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street, The freakin' Revenant! Once Upon a Time in Hollywood...

If The Revenant didn't prove his box office prowess, an art film set in the wilderness with hardly any dialogue, making over 500M worldwide, then nothing will.

And Will Smith most definitely helped the box office of Aladdin. Just as he did for Suicide Squad. I don't think that's even up for debate.

 

[Ctfxcwatcher]

If they can recapture the vibe from the first 3 movies then they will get my coins. Bring back Gore Verbinski or get a director that can capture that style.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Verbinski is too rebellious for the Disney now. I highly doubt they'll let him off his leash like they did for the sequels. If he returned, it wouldn't be the same. It would probably be safer and approved by several committees.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

This has always been, and will always be, Depp's franchise. This will simply not work and poor Karen Gillan is going to get caught on this sinking ship. I'll just add, I frankly don't understand this move from Disney. The thing they can least afford right now with all their parks closed is making bad decisions. Making another film from their only home grown franchise without having its primary selling point is mind boggling to say the least.

This, oh so totally this. The franchise was starting to fade with its main character still on board, without him at all? It will sink hard.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Verbinski is too rebellious for the Disney now. I highly doubt they'll let him off his leash like they did for the sequels. If he returned, it wouldn't be the same. It would probably be safer and approved by several committees.

Considering how meandering and bloated AWE was, he's no magic fix anyways.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Considering how meandering and bloated AWE was, he's no magic fix anyways.

He's not some magic fix, and it's a gamble with him, but I'll gladly take a bloated and meandering and insane movie over a safe, even toned, packaged, inoffensive movie Disney is probably gonna make to appease shareholders.

 

[TheVileOne]

Reboot or reimaginings are terms Hollywood came up with because "remake" became a dirty word. No one wanted their "remake" to be called a remake.

"It's not a remake! We are reimagining the story!"

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Reboot or reimaginings are terms Hollywood came up with because "remake" became a dirty word. No one wanted to be their "remake" to be called a remake.

"It's not a remake! We are reimagining the story!"

I do kind of see the need to differentiate though. To me a remake is a new retelling of a story already told, whereas a reboot is a new story and continuity featuring an existing character/franchise. For example, Casino Royale would be an example of a film that is both a reboot and a remake. It is a reboot because it resets the continuity of the EON James Bond for a new series of films and it is a remake of the 1954 and 1967 versions of Casino Royale.

But yes, I do feel the term is really abused.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Yeah, remake means same story new interpretation; The Thing, The Fly, all the Disney live-action versions of their animated films etc

But then that gets tricky because if it’s based on the same source material of a book, that doesn’t make the new film a remake of the old just because they’re based on the same source material. So Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings is not a remake of Bakshi’s Lord of the Rings or Denis Villeuneuve’s Dune a remake of Lynch’s Dune.

Reboot is something altogether different. Batman Begins is nothing like Batman 1989 thus isn’t a remake. Tim Burton’s Planet of the Apes is nothing like the original Planet of the Apes so it isn’t a remake either. Those are apt as reboots.

Then you have hybrids like Star Trek 2009 which is both a sequel/prequel to the old series/movies and a reboot of the old series/movies. This is probably the most famous nowadays and I think where people get confused. Because then you call The Force Awakens or Jurassic World reboots when they’re also sequels.

 

[TheVileOne]

OK, but it's still a vapid way of crappy new films getting called a remake, such as RoboCop.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

OK, but it's still a vapid way of crappy new films getting called a remake, such as RoboCop.

I would consider Robocop a remake and not a reboot myself.

 

[terry78]

The term is just a catch all to pass the torch or make changes to the timeline or some ****. Anybody that has beaten Final Fantasy 7 Remake already knows what that means.

 

[I Am The Knight]

I would consider Robocop a remake and not a reboot myself.

Robocop '14 is a remake. Viley is just confused

 

[Zorro]

Is there any truth to a rumor about a female led potc reboot or whatever?

 

[Pennywise]

 

[1627523]

He's not some magic fix, and it's a gamble with him, but I'll gladly take a bloated and meandering and insane movie over a safe, even toned, packaged, inoffensive movie Disney is probably gonna make to appease shareholders.

I agree. Looking back at the movies Disney was releasing in the 2000s compared to the 2010's It really feels like they were a different company. I'm not saying they gave full creative freedom back then or anything, but I think the fact that Disney didn't have all there ducks in a row in that decade compared to now, really allowed for weird curve balls like the POTC trilogy, Bridge of Terabithia, Holes, or Tron: Legacy to come out and surprise you. ESPECIALLY Bridge of Terabithia.

 

[CJ]

Disney already milked this series dry. Does anybody even care at this point?

 

[MOVIELORD101]

I agree. Looking back at the movies Disney was releasing in the 2000s compared to the 2010's It really feels like they were a different company. I'm not saying they gave full creative freedom back then or anything, but I think the fact that Disney didn't have all there ducks in a row in that decade compared to now, really allowed for weird curve balls like the POTC trilogy, Bridge of Terabithia, Holes, or Tron: Legacy to come out and surprise you. ESPECIALLY Bridge of Terabithia.

Except they horribly mis-marketed Bridge to Terabithia as a Narnia-esque movie and got a TON of flack for it. It's not a fantasy film. It's a coming-of-age drama with "pretend" fantasy sequences. It's like marketing Crimson Peak a horror movie when it's really a gothic romantic mystery thriller with minor, non-threatening supernatural elements.....OH WAIT, THAT HAPPENED TOO!