One bold claim I've seen in several places -- here's Eileen Jones's version at Jacobin -- is that it's "it’s not a sequel, reboot, or adaptation of anything." Truly original, maybe even escaping the frequent verdict that every movie plot is, in one way or another, just a Shakespeare re-hash.
I'm not sure about that, but the less obviously reliant it is on previously existing "intellectual property," the better.
I'm not going to pretend that I dislike all sequels, prequels, spinoffs, and reboots. Sometimes the second go-round is better than the first (the TV version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer versus the original movie, for example, and the TV version of The Punisher versus the John Travolta / Thomas Jane movie come to mind). But I do get tired of damn near everything being either an eternal franchise or a supposedly "fresh" retread of an old thing that doesn't even bother to change the title, the main characters, etc.
