Anyone else tired of Derivative Films?

[Wyldwraith]

Something I've been brooding over for ages, Over the last 15yrs or so, a profound change has come over the movie industry. Each year we see a higher percentage of remakes of older films (particularly horror films/slasher franchises), more book-to-movie adaptations, and the odd "reinterpretation" of a once-popular film. Coupled with those direct remakes we have what I call Peripheral Derivation. Popular comics/comic protagonists, movie extensions of popular TV series (including all the anime films derived from long-running series), and modern remakes of old/classic TV shows (like Doctor Who). IMO it's an understandable phenomena, but it creates several long-term problems for we the target audience. Problems that compound each other over time (IMHO of course). Studio execs/producers etc. look at all these Remakes as being "less risky" than original creative offerings. The money men reason that Intellectual Properties with established followings are something of a Sure Thing. The primary problem is obvious. The more big-budget remakes/reinterpretations that get the green light, the less resources and potential market share remaining for new/original movies. The innovative films that do get the green light seldom get the sort of budget needed to really fulfill the director's vision. From this stems the dread C-word. Compromise The first casualty and strike against the endangered species that are original movies is the cast. Without a blockbuster budget, A-list actors & actresses either can't be afforded or casting is forced into the difficult dilemma of choosing to put all their eggs in one basket and go with a single big name in the lead role, or diversifying and getting a few once-hot names that have slipped out of the limelight and can be acquired on the cheap. Both approaches have obvious problems that everyone here are familiar with. The usual result is that the director's hand is forced if he wants to retain enough of his budget to do justice to the other elements of the production. Most go with a cast of unknowns, and maybe a lead with solid potential and credentials who hasn't had much experience as a leading man/lady. A good example of this would be the Hellboy movies. (Yes, they're comic-based, and thus arguably derivative, but the source material is relatively unknown pre-movie-release in the mainstream.) Ron Perlman has a lot of experience, but very little of it as a leading man pre-Hellboy. Affordable, Guillermo was able to flesh out the rest of the roster with relative unknowns and new faces. This left him with enough cash for the massive amount of CGI, elaborate sets, extreme special effects and extensive stuntwork. The result was a solid action movie, and a prime example of a talented director doing his utmost to get maximum value from his available resources. Unfortunately, it isn't that easy a process. Not all genres lend themselves well to low-dollar casting, and all the other tricks directors use to stretch a buck. Then when they fail, all that happens is the studios become even more reluctant to take a chance on original works. Is there anyone here who isn't tired of "panning for gold" among a year's huge percentage of remakes to find something watchable? Anyone who isn't tired of the ever-growing lag between the year's very few original flicks that show promise? What is it about us? Why do we as a society seem unable to do the one thing that would end the ever-multiplying derivative crap Hollywood shovels down our throats every year? Ie: Vote against the slow death-by-constriction of real creativity by withholding our cash. Anyone? I sure don't know why. We all know it's happening. It pisses many if not the vast majority of us off. Yet we continue to tolerate...no, enable the manufacture of this slop that's strangling the potential of the imagination out of what makes it to our theater and TV screens. Why? Anyone?

[Mike70]

i think the prevalence of remakes is not so big a surprise if you know about the business side of things. companies can use a film/title/idea that they already own, one which presumably has made money before, instead of taking the time, effort and money to develop an original project.

[Danny]

last year peter jackson pointed out that district 9 was one of the few films, hell possibly the only film released commercially that wasn't an adaptation or a sequel. Film has become an increasingly lazy, 'in it for the money' business where the main goal is to franchise and nothing more.

[bassman]

Most commercial films have always been the same big budget, big star, big money, big sequel routine. If you want more originality you've got to weed out the independent and lesser known films. It's pretty much always been this way. As mike says, it's a business and they've been doing it for years. If you really don't want to see a certain film - don't see it. That's the only way you can make a small impact on their figures. Complaining about it, again as mike would say, is just keyboard masterbation.