I’m sick of people saying there are no original movies. Original movies come out literally every week, and I’m using the actual meaning of the word literally. Look at the website MovieInsider for a list of all the movies being released. Some recent original movies are quite popular too, like Sinners, KPop Demon Hunters, and Project Hail Mary. It pisses me off because if you care enough to complain, you should care enough to look up what movies are out instead of just knowing about the ones heavily advertised. I don’t know what video games are out but I would make an effort to know if I played video games. If you care what movies are out, you should look it up.
I think you might be judging these people too harshly. I think what they really mean is less that new movie ideas are not coming out and more that there are too many re-hashed ideas. The two ideas are easy to confuse. And I think you’ll admit that there have been long strings of superhero movies, tons of vampire movies, never-ending franchises and that doesn’t even include all of the tropes that get used over and over again. This leaves people like me wondering how many great ideas pitched to Hollywood are turned down in favor of another sequel because it’s perceived as the easiest way to make a quick buck. I’m always delighted when a movie surprises me because so few do.
Maybe I take things too literally because of my autism, but in the contexts I see these comments it seems to mean there are no movies that aren’t sequels or remakes. There are plenty of movies that aren’t sequels or remakes and these people seem to be willfully ignoring them. I’ve seen many movies this year, some have been sequels or remakes, some have not been. I personally count movies based on books as original, like the movie Reminders of Him, but that’s not good enough for some people. The authour of the novel had an original idea and it was made into a film, but no they won’t accept an adaptation as original. And yes, some original films are derivative of ideas that have been done before. All fiction is derivative of other fiction. It’s basically impossible fir it not to be at least a little derivative.
I concede that it is unfortunate that there are likely original ideas being rejected in favour of franchise movies. But I think part of the reason this happens is audiences are hypocritical. If the audience would put their money where their mouths are and see more original films, more original films would get made. Franchise films are getting made so often because it’s what people want, as proven by them making money. People blame the marketing for their choices. It’s a chicken and egg situation, franchise films make more money because they’re marketed more and they’re marketed more because they make more money. If people saw more original films, original films would get more marketing. I’m annoyed by people blaming the corporations for their own choice to see franchise movies more than original movies
Okay it was an adaptation, but it wasn’t a remake or a sequel. I understand the definition of original to be not remake or sequel. If adaptations don’t count, that significantly shrinks the number of original movies that have ever been made. Why is it not enough the movie isn’t part of an established film franchise, it also must not be an adaptation? The authour of the novel had an original idea and it was made into a film. The film is contributing to new, non-franchise, films being made popular. No, ideas must go straight to being film or they don’t count?
But for the purposes of these conversations, people are complaining about sequels and remakes being too prominent. I don’t see why an adaptation of a book that has never been adapted into film before should be part of that complaint
Okay, but you can’t just redefine established terminology to make it fit your argument. Besides, people complain about adaptations from other media just as much as about remakes and sequels.
People complain about original movies too, what’s your point? People are hypocrites. They ask why nothing original is being made and them Disney announced Hexed and it immediately got backlash. People are accusing it of being a ripoff of Owl House but there’s no good evidence of that. People complain no matter what.
Maybe I’ve misunderstood and people usually aren’t just complaining about franchise films but also about adaptations. To which I’m even MORE annoyed with their complaint about no original movies being made. The original Mean Girls was an adaptation. So that movie shouldn’t have been made? Why shouldn’t Hollywood look to books for material? Why this arbitrary demand that the movie can’t be based on anything? All stories are derivative. The original Star Wars was original, not a remake or adaptation, but it was inspired by Flash Gordon. It’s basically impossible to make a story with no connection to any preexisting story
Different categories apply depending on the context. Adaptations are a different category than remakes or sequels and in this context make sense to classify as original. It’s not based on any preexisting movie
That person didn’t list it as anything. Pay attention to who you’re replying to. For the purpose of the discussion about whether Hollywood is making any original movies, people mean as opposed to remakes and sequels
I dunno, all those movies you mention seemed to have a lot in common, like a protagonist who becomes unsatisfied with their life, enters a new realm with different rules, undergoes great trials, almost fails but receives unexpected aid, and ultimately gets what they sought but finds themself no longer fitting into their former life.
The most basic version is: normal person gets pushed out of their comfort zone, undergoes turmoil, comes out of this turmoil changed.
Unfortunately popular movies tend to make them all “tough guy gets pushed into violence, destruction ensues, he gets the girl and/or revenge” or “uptight person gets put in absurdly contrived cringy situations that are supposed to be funny, then comes out of the situation not uptight and gets the girl.”
I’m sick of people saying there are no original movies. Original movies come out literally every week, and I’m using the actual meaning of the word literally. Look at the website MovieInsider for a list of all the movies being released. Some recent original movies are quite popular too, like Sinners, KPop Demon Hunters, and Project Hail Mary. It pisses me off because if you care enough to complain, you should care enough to look up what movies are out instead of just knowing about the ones heavily advertised. I don’t know what video games are out but I would make an effort to know if I played video games. If you care what movies are out, you should look it up.
I think you might be judging these people too harshly. I think what they really mean is less that new movie ideas are not coming out and more that there are too many re-hashed ideas. The two ideas are easy to confuse. And I think you’ll admit that there have been long strings of superhero movies, tons of vampire movies, never-ending franchises and that doesn’t even include all of the tropes that get used over and over again. This leaves people like me wondering how many great ideas pitched to Hollywood are turned down in favor of another sequel because it’s perceived as the easiest way to make a quick buck. I’m always delighted when a movie surprises me because so few do.
Maybe I take things too literally because of my autism, but in the contexts I see these comments it seems to mean there are no movies that aren’t sequels or remakes. There are plenty of movies that aren’t sequels or remakes and these people seem to be willfully ignoring them. I’ve seen many movies this year, some have been sequels or remakes, some have not been. I personally count movies based on books as original, like the movie Reminders of Him, but that’s not good enough for some people. The authour of the novel had an original idea and it was made into a film, but no they won’t accept an adaptation as original. And yes, some original films are derivative of ideas that have been done before. All fiction is derivative of other fiction. It’s basically impossible fir it not to be at least a little derivative.
I concede that it is unfortunate that there are likely original ideas being rejected in favour of franchise movies. But I think part of the reason this happens is audiences are hypocritical. If the audience would put their money where their mouths are and see more original films, more original films would get made. Franchise films are getting made so often because it’s what people want, as proven by them making money. People blame the marketing for their choices. It’s a chicken and egg situation, franchise films make more money because they’re marketed more and they’re marketed more because they make more money. If people saw more original films, original films would get more marketing. I’m annoyed by people blaming the corporations for their own choice to see franchise movies more than original movies
Project Hail Mary is an adaptation
Okay it was an adaptation, but it wasn’t a remake or a sequel. I understand the definition of original to be not remake or sequel. If adaptations don’t count, that significantly shrinks the number of original movies that have ever been made. Why is it not enough the movie isn’t part of an established film franchise, it also must not be an adaptation? The authour of the novel had an original idea and it was made into a film. The film is contributing to new, non-franchise, films being made popular. No, ideas must go straight to being film or they don’t count?
Because original film has a specific meaning, that it isn’t adapted from an underlying work.
But for the purposes of these conversations, people are complaining about sequels and remakes being too prominent. I don’t see why an adaptation of a book that has never been adapted into film before should be part of that complaint
Okay, but you can’t just redefine established terminology to make it fit your argument. Besides, people complain about adaptations from other media just as much as about remakes and sequels.
People complain about original movies too, what’s your point? People are hypocrites. They ask why nothing original is being made and them Disney announced Hexed and it immediately got backlash. People are accusing it of being a ripoff of Owl House but there’s no good evidence of that. People complain no matter what.
Maybe I’ve misunderstood and people usually aren’t just complaining about franchise films but also about adaptations. To which I’m even MORE annoyed with their complaint about no original movies being made. The original Mean Girls was an adaptation. So that movie shouldn’t have been made? Why shouldn’t Hollywood look to books for material? Why this arbitrary demand that the movie can’t be based on anything? All stories are derivative. The original Star Wars was original, not a remake or adaptation, but it was inspired by Flash Gordon. It’s basically impossible to make a story with no connection to any preexisting story
Different categories apply depending on the context. Adaptations are a different category than remakes or sequels and in this context make sense to classify as original. It’s not based on any preexisting movie
Some of our most beloved classical movies are adaptations. What’s your point?
Name one anime that wasn’t a manga first.
You erroneously listed it as an example of an original film, is my point.
That person didn’t list it as anything. Pay attention to who you’re replying to. For the purpose of the discussion about whether Hollywood is making any original movies, people mean as opposed to remakes and sequels
deleted by creator
I dunno, all those movies you mention seemed to have a lot in common, like a protagonist who becomes unsatisfied with their life, enters a new realm with different rules, undergoes great trials, almost fails but receives unexpected aid, and ultimately gets what they sought but finds themself no longer fitting into their former life.
Just something I’ve noticed.
That is the standard plot for any good story.
The most basic version is: normal person gets pushed out of their comfort zone, undergoes turmoil, comes out of this turmoil changed.
Unfortunately popular movies tend to make them all “tough guy gets pushed into violence, destruction ensues, he gets the girl and/or revenge” or “uptight person gets put in absurdly contrived cringy situations that are supposed to be funny, then comes out of the situation not uptight and gets the girl.”