I see one of the keys to considering it a "reboot" is revisiting the origin story, with the aim of saying, "This is NOT part of any existing timeline for this character, this is an entirely self-contained new universe that does not hinge on what's already been established." So event though Batman Returns and Batman Forever bear little resemblance to Burton's 2 Batman movies, I don't consider them reboots since they weren't an attempt to start everything from scratch and create a new timeline independent of what was before. Whereas Batman Begins is clearly a reboot since it went back to square one.
In that vein, Chris Reeve definitely counts as a reboot.
Raime's Spiderman, even though there hadn't been a widely popular incarnation of Spiderman since the old cartoon series, is still a reboot by that definition.
Trek is a bit of an oddball in that it tied itself into the existing timeline instead of just ignoring that timeline and creating its own. But the end result is essentially the same as a reboot, with the connection to the original timeline thrown in, as I've theorized before, to soften the blow to an audience that would otherwise not have been receptive to a reboot.
__________________
'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.'
-TJ
|