Back to the Future is one of the most popular science-fiction movies ever made. Scene after scene has something either quotable or iconic, recognizable to almost everyone. Many have hoped for a continuation of the franchise, whether as a reboot or a sequel, and it turns out there were discussions about a possible remake with Tom Holland. However, the Spider-Man: Far From Home star says those talks didn't go anywhere, remarking, “[Back to the Future] is the most perfect film or one of the most perfect films,” it can “never be made better.”
Holland -- who was deepfaked into a remake video alongside Avengers: Endgame co-star Robert Downey Jr. -- has a point. There are a few instances where a remake improved on the original movie, but most have been disappointing. These are remakes that brought nothing to the table and may even tarnish the original. And the stakes would be even higher with Back to the Future. The margin for error when remaking a staple of pop culture is even smaller than when remaking other films.
Back to the Future has been a part of millions of lives since it was released in 1985. It’s constantly referenced in film, TV and books this day. And since it's already everywhere, it doesn't seem like a reboot would help burnish the movie's legacy. If the remake turns out to be worse than the original, future generations would be exposed to an inferior version of a great film. This could lead to less interest in the franchise as a whole and the original film, in particular, which would be a shame.
The 2016 Ghostbusters remake serves as a cautionary tale. There was a great deal of backlash and controversy surrounding the movie because of its gender-swapped ghostbusters. Yet, ultimately, women ghostbusting wasn't what made the movie inferior to the classic 1984 original. No, the worst problem with the Ghostbusters remake was that it was trite and unwilling to take risks. The movie was so afraid of alienating fans that it played it safe at every turn.
It recreated the character archetypes and some of the beats of the original film, but never put its own unique spin on them. It starred four of the funniest women on the planet and then failed to let them loose to do what they do best. The film's studio and director Paul Feig seemed so afraid of the potential backlash their remake of a cultural touchstone would attract that they made a movie that was uninspired and uninteresting.
The goal of a remake should be to pay homage to the original film while presenting an original, updated take on the story. This is a high-wire act that's incredibly difficult to accomplish. Numerous popular films of the 1980s have already failed as remakes, from Footloose to Red Dawn and from Overboard to RoboCop. And none of these titles have the same cultural cachet that Back to the Future does.
Despite the long list of movie remakes that have been box office duds, Hollywood is still searching for the elusive "sure thing." As a result, the film industry will continue to remake successful movies in the hope of re-capturing lightning in a bottle. So, Holland's awareness that the cost of remaking a film as iconic and popular as Back to the Future could far outweigh the benefits is refreshing. Hopefully, it's a perspective other actors and filmmakers will share.