BASED Hartman!

BASED Hartman!

Attached: 22F7554E-96B2-4945-8A87-B831C3178BB1.png (785x408, 79.45K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fOwkFfn1ToU
youtube.com/watch?v=tdR_GU3Hi9U
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Why call yourself an artist if you trace shit

A very generic and superfluous statement. Does he think Gus Van Sant's Psycho remake is good because it's basically a shot-to-shot remake? If you're rebooting/remaking something changes are inevitable and necessary. The key is if those changes work and if you're making a good new interpretation.

McQueen and Hoffman's Papillon is a cinema classic but they actually managed to make the recently made remake fairly decent and different enough to be a good movie on its own terms even if it isn't as amazing as the original.

Because you want the automatic audience that comes with using the franchise. Duh.

youtube.com/watch?v=fOwkFfn1ToU

>Fence sitting centrist who criticize people for saying nothing of substance while doing the same thing

Cool, now watch it past the 3:30 mark

Why watch a reboot if it's just the same shit that lead to the initial show being canceled?

Cool, I have already watched this retard Channel when it was new and popular

He would purposely twist his arguments to try to find something that doesn’t have a equal; into one

But that's literally what happened in the later seasons FOP, technically it's not a reboot but it might as well be.

People like OP just create traffic. Quantity over quality, etc. Apparently that is a good thing.

He's not wrong.
The whole point of a remake is to tap into the old base of fans that enjoyed it to begin with while introducing it to new potential fans. If you change the core aspects of the show then what the fuck was the point in remaking something?

Bryke did (not) listen to this

>Christian fundie
>approved Danny Phantom watching girls taking a shit

Arguing against a strawman

What part of 'change everything about it that people loved' does your small mind not comprehend ?

Attached: 82873651265335.jpg (255x222, 14.17K)

youtube.com/watch?v=tdR_GU3Hi9U

Making a blanket statement like that is meaningless because you're just asking people to go "yeah, change bad!" by inferring reboots/remakes are bad because they changed the specific thing(s) people liked about the original.

The point of a reboot is easy money and a better initial audience, don't kid yourself

But he doesn't say 'change bad', he says 'change everything people loved'

If you don't have an honest argument, go back to your discord channel

I don’t think he ever traced.

What people love about any given topic can mean a million different and often conflicting things depending who you talk to and thus there is no "everything". Hartman is making a dumb abd generic blanket statement about remakes/reboots bad because change. It's a lazy and superfluous statement appealing to morons like you

He has

user...

Attached: 60341d6cbed5c50011a2be9b.jpeg.jpg (750x563, 66.03K)

The ran one is worst lmaooo

And yet the reboots fail each and every time. But feel free to try it again and prove me wrong

Do... you not know what tracing is?

This, it's like She-Ra.
If people loved the flashy combat, skimpy women, and magical mystery but then you reboot it and cover up the women and remove anything sexual, make the combat boring, and focus on gays and their feelings, why call it She-Ra and not just make your own IP?

You can take one look at that and see it isn't traced.

Hi butch

Overlay it if you really have to if you lack visual perception.

Most art is referenced, and any unreferenced humanoid will be able to be traced to an earlier work unless you do something insane like Jack O pose

>tweet that after making 3 live-action FOP movies that changed everything people loved about FOP in the first place

Tracing is drawing over someone's image to look the exact same. Using an image as a reference and reproducing is is more akin to copying/bootlegging.

No they don't.

They rebooted Transformers comics and was fairly successful. They rebooted DC comics in the 80s to great success. They rebooted Bond and people liked it. They rebooted She-Ra and it did well. They've rebooted Scooby Doo who knows how many times now. The thing was improved by a remake.

Almost nobody fucking knows Trues Lies is a remake of a French or Belgium movie because the Cameron version is super popular. Goddam Nolan Batman is a reboot. Death Race franchise has bazillion sequels after the 00s reboot. Godzilla's multiple REBOOTS are great. Halloween 2019 was good unlike the numerous sequels before it. Dredd was amazing reboot. Brendan Fraser Mummy movies are a reboot. You're being such a stupid fucking moron by making stupid claims, I mean holy shit, do you have even two brain cells left to rub against one another?

why are you so dumb?

A revolutionary statement that only He could come up with. But honestly if you look at the live action continuation it's pretty damn close to the series despite being awful and zero budget.

Speaking of Godzilla, you could point to ‘98 as an example as a bad reboot because the creators said “our version of Godzilla will be better” instead of “let’s make our version of Godzilla”

If you're going to change everything people liked about the original, why not just make something new?
I think we both know the answer to that question.

Attached: FQL5VcEWQAQ-3-H.png (301x360, 154.83K)

>fundie

Attached: 984C8342-A12B-4E94-B37B-7131F50D5429.png (427x400, 17.15K)

I saw the original She-Ra. It had absolutely fucking nothing of what you just claimed it had outside of "skimpy women". Waking up and seeing it was on TV was instantly depressing.

Hes one to talk

Theres that shitty live action FOP out right now

Attached: D6uOaQgUEAAJgnb.jpg (918x1200, 128.73K)

But who decides what was "everything people liked"? Like I'm a Transformers fan, that is a series that reboots itself every single new version, and every single new version brought in new kids, so every kind of fan has it's own idea of "my first Transformers". Which one of them has more of a claim on what is Transformers and how it should behave? Answer: no one does, which is why the most chill fans are the ones that find the rebooting as part of the fun while the purists are the ones who rip their hair off in silly arguments.

Wow, you really like that meme don't you? You know, using shitty overused memes is the type of shit 9gag used to do and Yea Forums criticized, of course that was before you arrived.

> Wow, you really like that meme don't you? You know, using shitty overused memes is the type of shit 9gag used to do and Yea Forums criticized, of course that was before you arrived.

Attached: 48BB956A-3729-4A9A-98A4-6835E6E1F7B4.png (722x1199, 412.59K)

Transformers is different from an actual film, Transformers exists to sell toys to kids.
It's not the same as something like Total Recall, or The Thing, or Suspiria (not that the remake was bad).
Transformers is basically just an endless conveyer belt of consumption, so it makes sense that it's constantly rebooting so it can constantly sell more merchandise.

Everyone likes the Democratic Republic of Carbombya. EVERYONE.

A reboot is still a reboot. It does matter if the franchise exists to sell toys.

The point is that Transformers doesn't have actual fans of individual films, it has fans of the IP, fans of the toys.
As such they're not comparable to an actual film.

>The point is that Transformers doesn't have actual fans of individual films

You absolutely have people who grew up with specific version of the franchise and prefer their childhood Transformers to other versions. It is no different from people who like Connery Bond over Craig Bond or vice versa.

Right, and like Bond Transformers can constantly reboot itself, since it's not about the individual movies, but about the IP.
You're EXTREMELY unlikely to find anyone who calls themselves a Bond fan but only likes a single Bond film.
The same applies to Transformers, you're unlikely to find a fan of that property who only likes a SINGLE film and still calls themselves a fan of the property.

The only significant difference is that thanks time they've grown into franchises due to success. If anything that makes the argument that reboots can't be good all the more idiotic because franchises such as that prove they can do that even with drastic changes. Hell, it's arguable the only way you keep a franchise alive is through drastic changes because the old take inevitably grows old and campy with time and new audiences want something different and new.

They've grown into franchises thanks to advertising.
If you want to make something different, just make a new IP.
Hell, part of why Bond and Transformers have lasted so long is because they HAVEN'T changed much.
Bond is still about a globetrotting spy fighting foreign baddies (though the recent movie was pretty shit) and Transformers is still about giant robot fights.
No one would want to see these franchises turn into romantic comedies.

that new earthworm jim thing comes to mind, literally the "he's normal now" mario movie joke article

>No one would want to see these franchises turn into romantic comedies.

But that's fairly apt description of what the Roger Moore years were like.

And his era of Bond films is generally considered the worst by Bond fans.

Because the point is to make it different. Why reboot it to do the same shit? Just watch the original shit again.

Why reboot at all?
Just make something new.

Later retrospectives doesn't change the fact that they were highly successful at the time of their release.