Our mission at SAW is to foster conversations about this thing we all love (or love to hate): film/TV. Many of our features are designed with you in mind. Your opinions, to be more to the point. You have ’em. We want to hear ’em.
Question of the Day (QOTD) is exactly what it sounds like. It’s a film/TV-related question that we put to you, the reader. The comments section below is like the feedback box at work; except, in this example, we actually read what you write and care about what you have to say.
We need your help. The other day in the SAW virtual office, a discussion quickly turned into a debate over the topic of whether Mad Max: Fury Road qualifies as a legacy sequel or if it is a reboot (reboot sequel? requel?). Can a movie be a legacy sequel if it recasts its main character, tiptoes around its place in the timeline, and really only fits the bill because it’s been x-many years after the last movie? Would this even be a debate if George Miller hadn’t directed the movie? Would we have just called it a reboot, no questions asked?
Also, if it is a legacy sequel, is it the greatest one there is, or is it a great movie, but not a great legacy sequel? Sailor thinks it can be a legacy sequel and a reboot, while I’d argue it’s a reboot sequel, but not a legacy sequel because there’s nothing to suggest this isn’t a reboot, whereas a legacy sequel like Top Gun: Maverick, Jurassic World, or Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle makes it clear this is a sequel to the original movie, picking up decades later with a new cast, returning actors, and nostalgia-fueled story that acknowledges what came before it.
So, yeah, what do you think: would you label Mad Max: Fury Road as a legacy sequel or a reboot, reboot sequel, standalone sequel, etc.?
I’ll see you in the trenches.
