Cinematical

The originality in Hollywood has been dead for sometime now. People making remakes and making book adaptions prove that Hollywood has no originality.

Reply

I guess originality is a problematic concept when you remember that "Citizen Kane" was inspired at least partially by the life of William Hearst, "Singin' in the Rain" was a movie wrapped around songs from MGM musicals in the beginning of the sound era, and "On the Waterfront" was inspired by reportage by Malcolm Johnson. Even remakes are not totally bad - consider that John Huston made the third, and definitive version, of "The Maltese Falcon". That said, Hollywood at this time can be said to be intellectually lazy and too dependent on films made on pre-tested ideas or familiar titles. A film based on a comic book is in itself not terrible, but not everyone has the style of Tim Burton or Sam Raimi. Likewise, remaking a film is not always bad, for example John Sturges' remake of Akira Kurosawa, "The Magnificent Seven". But most of the remakes essentially coast on the audiences' familiarity with the material. There is certainly on over-reliance on foreign language films with remakes of "Il Mare" as "The Lake House", and "Pulse" as recent examples, and the upcoming remake of the Italian "The Last Kiss". Why I hate most mainsteam Hollywood films has to do with the lack of imagination (and I don't mean relying of special effects) by most filmmakers.

Reply

Originality is not dead...it's just harder to find.

Brick for instance is a very original, well made movie that's like nothing the studios have produced in many years.

Reply

Another good example of originality: Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang. Shane Black's directorial debut blows away most of the films of the past few years.

Squid and the Whale stand outs too.

Reply

originality in hollywood? never really there. what i think we're talking about here is creativity, which has to be viewed through a rather critical lens, if you will.

of the top ten titles above listed as "original", singin' in the rain was crafted around a dozen songs previously written and recorded for other films and in some cases were old enough to be standards of the day in 1950. this standard of adaptation was and has been the calling card of hollywood since it's inception.

since the 1970's we've seen film schools move beyond training filmmakers to think creatively into becoming technicians. some might argue that technology is to blame but technology isn't responsible for formating the screenplay into hard and fast rules of plot points and page-based acts. students of film may know their history better than imdb but they couldn't explain the hows and whys of developmental context.

citizen kane's creative and historical links include the federal theatre project, welles' mercury theatre (and radio theatre in general), an understanding of the hearst newspapers role in the spanuish civil war and its gossip columnists, the life of wm. randolph hearst, the politics of tammany hall, the unionization efforts of the depression, and the technological developments of GE in creating the lighting necessary to create the depth of focus involved, among others. you don't need to know any of this to enjoy the film *but* you do need to have absorbed and inculcated all of this in order to create the film.

back in the 80's when coppola was going through a troubled period post-one from the heart he looked into his crystal ball and suggested that once the technology was there he invisioned some 20 year old kid taking a video camera out and making the ultimate, authentic version of jack kerouac's on the road, anticipating a fall of the old studio system and the return of a creative hollywood. but where's the money in that? no stars? no special effects? no interest. yeah, yeah, clearks and all that, but it hasn't exactly yeilded a renaissance, has it?

sadly, the real problem is an uneducated public. we no longer teach art history or appreciation and we've never bothered with any sort of media history or appreciation. the vast majority no longer know when a film has been remade, nor do they care. i've heard people in video stores refuse to rent a movie because it was in black and white. i've known people to turn down viewing john sayles' films because "he makes you think too much." i no longer find it surprising when people profess to having never seen a foriegn film because, after all, "who wants to go to a movie and read!" (and especially when nearly 30% of this country is functionally illiterate).

is originality dead? originality doesn't rake in the big bucks. apple didn't invent the mp3 player they just made it cool. originality means taking a risk with creativity, and you won't find favorable odds in vegas on that marker. hollywood is about money. adapt comic books and remake old TV shows and mediocre 20 year old films and you're golden. the rest is just the sound of coffehouse intellectuals spinning their wheels over the good old days.

myself included.

Reply

its not that theres nothing original left, its just that you have to rifle through all the crap to get to it. also just because something is original it dosent mean its good. (ahem* Little Man anyone?)

Reply

If originality is not dead, it sure is sleeping. A big issue with me lately has been predictability. I can not remember the last movie I saw that didn't have a predictable outcome or story line.

Reply

There are over 100,000 screenplays registered with the WGA annually, so don't tell me originality is dead. What is dead is the methods that producers are discovering these ideas. They need to start taking chances again. Instead of lining their pockets with the profits from mega sequels and summer blockbusters, they need to funnel that cash into more indie and risky projects. Lets have a diverse and fun choice at the weekend metroplex and not go eenie-meenie-minie at six versions of the same thing.

Reply

I have no problem with a first movie being based off a play or book. The lack of originality is the several dozen remakes of that particular movie. How many times does the Titanic have to be re-made? What isn't a remake today? Dukes of Hazzard, Spiderman, Superman, Pink Pather and even barely known movies like Vanishing Point are rip off's. What existing movie will the 70's and onward generation of effeminate movie geeks, who have little life experience which shows in their movies, butcher next? I'm waiting for the Dirty Harry 2006 to debut. I'm expecting Mike Myers or Jim Carrey to play the role of Inspector Calihan. Who knows, they never cease to amaze me. Maybe Eminem or Will Smith gets the role or even more radical, a woman playing the role of Dirty Harry.

Reply

One of my favorite things to do is to go to the movies. I would go every weekend if there was a good movie to see. I can probably count on one hand the amount of times I've gone this year. I think I'll go again after EVERY TV show and book has been redone. Has Golden Girls, or The Hardy Boys been done yet.

Reply