I read an article the other day on MSN news, about 'remakes'. It was called something like, 'Second time isn't the charm' or something? It was about remakes that failed at the box office compared to the originals (adjusted for inflation).

I'm usually against re-makes, with some very specific exceptions. Like I'm fine with continuously remaking comic book movies... since, well, they aren't really remakes, they're 'reboots.' And it kind of just fits the nature of the comic book beast, since comics are a constantly 'rebooting' and 'retconing' things all over the place. And there's also adaptations of cartoons, and books and video games, and it really depends on how 'pulpy' the property is. Every once in a while though, there is an adaption of a novel or comic, that transcends the original format, and becomes its own entity, and should not be tampered with. Easiest example... 'Gone with the Wind', you could remake 'Gone with the Wind', but you shouldn't.

To me, movies are an 'art', and in 'art' a photocopy of a painting isn't worth as much as the original. Follow me? Worth even less, is someone untalented attempting to copy a painting with there own brush and canvass.

Thats not what I'm really talking about though, I'm actually talking about, a slight pet peeve of mine. Which is how people criticize remakes, not the fact that people DO criticize them, but HOW they do it.
People love this line when talking about remakes, it was used in the MSN article that started this whole thing actually.

“There’s no original idea's left in Hollywood!”

Actually, yes there is. Theres lots in fact. Thousands of screen plays are written a year, and the mass majority of them are original concepts, they simply don't get made. You know why?... MONEY. MOVIES ARE MADE FOR MONEY.

We see a trailer for a movie, we go pay and see the movie. They make back the MILLIONS of dollars it took to make the movie, (and some), and they go on to make another movie. And the process begins again. The reason they do remakes, sequels and adaptations is, its a tested property, one that they can be sure they'll make their money back on.

They don't re-make movies that weren't a successes in the first place, they don't make sequels to movies that didn't make money, and they don't adapt books like 'The Hunger Games' because the story is good. The do it because they already have an audience. They don't need to win you over, that already have you, before the script is finished.

Movies cost an insane amount of money to make, out of all the forms of art, its the riskiest to create. You need a note book and pencil to write a poem, but it takes hundreds of people, with different skills, hundreds of hours, with lots of equipment, to create a film. (Granted you can do a film for cheaper, with less hands but were talking a Hollywood block buster).

If you're Joe Producer and you've given people your money to make a movie, don't you want it to have good odds of making your money back? If yes, you want a tested property, AKA: A remake, sequel or adaptation. Not something original, because original is risky.

Its very simple. There is plenty of idea's in Hollywood, they're just being repressed. Who is to blame for this?... Well... Everyone is. People like familiarity, we don't like strange or different, we want something we can peg on sight, now more then ever because... Well the cost of going and seeing a movie is so high! We want to know what we're paying for, no surprises. That's why the tell you who is involved in the making of the movie, its called name recognition, “From the Director of 'Two girls one cup' comes a film about love.”
If what we get is to different from what we expect, or like, we'll feel ripped off, like all those people that went to see 'Drive' thinking it'd be like 'Fast and the Furious'.

We'll see it, and hate it, then go on facebook, twitter or our blog and proclaim “Drive suxed! So boring! #Iwantgenricmovies.” You in that moment become a self published reviewer, and everyone on your feed is going to go, “Jimbo Johnson says 'Drive' sucked. I guess I wont see it.”

I know it seems stupid, and unlikely, but mass communication plays a huge part in the theater life of a movie. It used to be a that a shitty movie would last on the screen a few weeks before word of mouth spread of its shittyness. But now we can reach hundreds of people, who we would never even imagine talking too, by making a 6 second facebook comment.

We are speaking to Hollywood with our money. And what our money is saying, is we want another genericly painful romantic comedy staring Katherine Heigl. We want another Vin Diesal peck fest. We want another Super hero movie. We want the same'ol, same'ol. And Hollywood is listening.

Oh! Almost forgot. Congratulations at the Razzies Adam Sandler.

Leave a Reply.