Why are most movies today-remakes?

[Murdoch]

When they remake it. The show sucks. There is a whole list of movies to be remade and i have to wonder has the well run dry. Is that it for creativity. I read a rumor that the six million dollar man was to be remade as the six billion dollar man. This excited me but will they trash it like others of recent past. Hmmm. GM

 

[El Duderino]

Mostly because originality in Hollywood is dead, they just recycle the same garbage over and over again. Creativity and original ideas are out there, but so seldomly given the chance. It's all about the easy money in Hollywood and they know people will see the remake.

 

[Sigma-LS]

You need to stop looking at it from an artist's perspective and look at it more from a gambler's perspective.

Makin' the safe bets.


I find remakes to be a mixed bag, some good most bad. Kind of like those cans of mixed nuts that promise great variety but wind up being 3/4 peanuts. But as long as they bring in money, they'll keep being made.

 

[Murdoch]

It's a sad state of affairs. I would love to see an original sci-fi movie. Like what if a team of scientist and archeologists had discoverd relics of alien life on our planet like tech-remains only to discover that it is us who are the aliens...GM

 

[AJK001]

The people Hollywood or whoever makes the movies don't have any original ideas or are unwilling to pay for them, so they go back and use what worked in the past. This means we get movies remade every 10 to 20 years. I was sadded, but not surprised, to see that they have even been remaking movies from the early 2000's.

 

[Coz]

Hollywood eats itself. Always has - there were remakes back in the 20s, even.

These days, I think there are two things going on-

1, Title cache: People know the name, but never saw the original movie. Hence the tentpole horror movie remakes like Halloween, Texas Chainsaw, etc (in addition, horror movies are often cheaper to make and draw a teen audience).

2, Fan W@ank: The kids who saw the original during their formative years (either at the cinema or on TV) are in the position to make a low-risk remake (hey, it'll make money on DVD, right?) rather than come up with an original idea that might not work.

Prequels are another fruit of this poison tree- I just watched the Thing 'premake' - how pointless is that movie to fans of the Carpenter movie? We needed to see what made Hannibal Lecter a cannibal? Or why Michael Myers was a kill-crazy nutjob?

I'm waiting for the prequel to Jaws, where Quint first encounters the same great white after the sinking of the Indianapolis, and the entire backstory of how the great white was mistreated by it parents.

Ya know what? Scew remakes - I wanna see some crossover movies - the killer in Saw is actually Macauley Kulkins character from Home Alone all grown up, Pumpkinhead is what evil Gremlins grow up to be...

How about spin off movies completley unrelated to the original? 'King Dog', about the trials and tribulations of a 1930s hotdog vendor in New York who tries to make a new snack available to the public - made from giant monkey meat.

C.

 

[charades]

As my favorite tv creator/director Jeff Davis has said, it's not that there is a lack of creativity. It's that Hollywood lacks courage.

 

[cpltony]

There has been some original stuff, like Cloverfield.
Yes the plot has been done, but it was new and exciting...somewhat.

I just see it as a lack of willingness to bet on something that's not already been established.

 

[Warpaint]

It seems to me that movie making is a business.

Would you sustain that business by taking multiple adverse risks or low risk actions with signifigant ROI?

I don't like it either, but I get it. It is not a lack of creativity - go visit any of the many screenplay sites or crowdfunding sites to see whats out there. If anything, the recent trend of "unoriginality" in Hollywood has spurred many new writers and creators. With the current state of technology and the growing channels for independent content distribution, getting your film made is more accessable than ever.

 

[Solo4114]

Hollywood eats itself. Always has - there were remakes back in the 20s, even.

These days, I think there are two things going on-

1, Title cache: People know the name, but never saw the original movie. Hence the tentpole horror movie remakes like Halloween, Texas Chainsaw, etc (in addition, horror movies are often cheaper to make and draw a teen audience).

2, Fan W@ank: The kids who saw the original during their formative years (either at the cinema or on TV) are in the position to make a low-risk remake (hey, it'll make money on DVD, right?) rather than come up with an original idea that might not work.

Prequels are another fruit of this poison tree- I just watched the Thing 'premake' - how pointless is that movie to fans of the Carpenter movie? We needed to see what made Hannibal Lecter a cannibal? Or why Michael Myers was a kill-crazy nutjob?

I'm waiting for the prequel to Jaws, where Quint first encounters the same great white after the sinking of the Indianapolis, and the entire backstory of how the great white was mistreated by it parents.

Ya know what? Scew remakes - I wanna see some crossover movies - the killer in Saw is actually Macauley Kulkins character from Home Alone all grown up, Pumpkinhead is what evil Gremlins grow up to be...

How about spin off movies completley unrelated to the original? 'King Dog', about the trials and tribulations of a 1930s hotdog vendor in New York who tries to make a new snack available to the public - made from giant monkey meat.

C.

That was...just....beautiful, man. Brought a tear to my eye, so it did.

 

[Dozer3677]

Video games suffer the same fate. In fact, a little over a year ago, I was reading an article in Game Informer saying the same thing. That companies would much rather make a low risk sequel to a successful game that may stink then invest money into a brand new original idea.

 

[wuwu]

Money, money, money.....moooooneeeeey!

To elaborate, remakes are low risk to invest a few million in because of it's built-in fanbase which is the main reason why there were so many horror movie remakes.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

I think people wouldn't frown so much on remakes if it was more fifty/fifty or the remakes were used to fund original ideas. Now it just seems remakes is used to just keep things flowing so the exec's can keep their comfy job.

 

[third3ye]

As everyone here has said, this trend boils down to the industry business. Movies generally cost more to make and revenue has not grown fast enough to hold the rate of return, so it's now more financially risky to produce mainstream films than it was decades ago. Studios want to hedge their bets, so they pursue franchises that are proven and with substantial fan base, and can potentially become film franchises with multiple sequels.

This applies not just to remakes but for the recent trend of written source material adaptations, basically the comic book movies, Hunger Games, and Harry Potters of this world. Any content out there in any medium is game for a film adaption, so long as the fan base is large enough.

I do believe that this trend stymies creativity in Hollywood, but at the same time with big talent attached to projects like Looper and Inception, original films that are actually good still make it to our local theaters. Unfortunately Transformers makes more money than these types of films, so you can blame the audience for continuing to spend their money on this type of trashy entertainment.

 

[Clerval]

Because people go see them. Butts in seats for little risk.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Sadly, we can't enforce a stupid tax.

 

[Mr Webber]

In an ideal world, it would be easy to raise the substantial amount of finance needed to create a cinema experience for a discerning audience but it aint.

I have never been involved myself but know someone who invested a substantial sum of their own money in a movie that before release was considered dead in the water, this literally aged him. Turned out ok, the movie was Crocodile Dundee.

 

[Shadow345]

Ironically, this thread topic is something that gets "remade" quite often.

 

[tgreco]

Hollywood doesn't make movies anymore... it develops properties... and then when they squeeze every last penny out of it, they reboot it.

if it's not already a reboot, or sequel, it's a popular new book that again already has a built in audience.

If you don't like that, then watch more indie films. That's where the originality is... there's still plenty of original movies and ideas out there, it's just not likely they're going to show up at your multiplex.

In short, buy more indie DVDs or BluRays... or see more art house cinema. Hollywood will follow the money

 

[AJK001]

Prequels are another fruit of this poison tree- I just watched the Thing 'premake' - how pointless is that movie to fans of the Carpenter movie? We needed to see what made Hannibal Lecter a cannibal? Or why Michael Myers was a kill-crazy nutjob?
C.

I think it's funny that you mention Carpenter's The Thing when his Thing was a remake of the classic 1950's movie staring James Arness (of Gunsmoke fame) as the monster. What is even more ironic is that Carpenter's The Thing was remade last year. I still think the original is the best, even though you can tell they were never outside of California when they shot the outdoor sequences.