Derivative. This is perhaps the most appropriate word to describe the nature of the entertainment industry of the 20th century. So much of what is being created is predicated not only on films of the past but also on contemporary films.
The vast majority of films that emerge out of Hollywood are indeed formulaic. Interesting, unique, and engaging plots are becoming less significant. Often, they are either woefully simplistic in nature or hopelessly convoluted. Instead, the primary focus of Hollywood is to rely solely on the marketability, not necessarily the talent, of actors and actresses. Thus, charisma and attractiveness are more valuable than sensational acting abilities because often times these attributes yield a higher entertainment value and thus, a higher commercial value. Even the characters that these actors and actresses are portraying are indicative of a startling lack of originality. Looking at the protagonists of these blockbuster films, it’s easy to see that these characters too are formulaic. For instance, the overwhelming surge of Marvel movies that has dominated the cinematic landscape has yielded characters that may closely resemble the comic book characters that they are derived from but most of these characters' personalities are virtually the same. The protagonist is often morally compromised or at least isn't necessarily overly heroic or admirable. They are often sarcastic, witty, and charming and seem reluctant to be a hero. Yet, as we already know by the end of the movie they have accepted their role and “saved the day.” This is essentially the mold that most of the protagonists of today’s films fit into. Of course, there are obviously going to be deviations from this.
Why do these plots and characters that are seemingly unoriginal exist? Simply put, they are what the general audience is familiar and comfortable with seeing. The immense commercial value of successfully entertaining the masses is perhaps the primary reason why film studios have a strong preference for consistency and rely on this sort of formula for film-making. Yet, this simply is not the full explanation for the sheer amount of derivative and unoriginal films that plague modern cinema.
Many films and even television shows that have emerged in the last decade are either adaptations of various works or remakes of other films. The abundance of adaptations is not necessarily an indicator of the lack of creativity that is systematized in Hollywood. Adapting a particular work for the big screen is a tremendous and worthy endeavor. In fact, some of the greatest films in history have been adaptions of other works. Although the film deviated significantly from the source material, Francis Ford Coppola’s “Apocalypse Now” (adapted from Joseph Conrad’s book “Heart of Darkness”) is undoubtedly one of the greatest films of all time. Although I previously criticized some of Marvel’s movie adaptations, the idea of converting a comic book to a film is extremely ambitious. My criticism with Marvel was primarily with their depictions of characters with seemingly indistinguishable personalities. For the most part, film adaptations can be unique, inspired works of art because they are not merely vessels meant to convey the original work but in a different medium. Rather, they often invoke a strong sense of identity in both works that strongly differentiates the two in various ways.
Thus, the lack of originality in modern cinema can be found in this idea of remaking films or continuing a film series long after its origination. In today’s cinema, there are so many examples of both of these things. “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” is perhaps one of the more recent examples. Numerous film series have been rebooted, including “Star Wars” and “Alien.” Even recent film series are being rebooted, such as “Pirates of the Caribbean.” Some films are getting sequels years later like “Blade Runner 2049” and “Mad Max: Fury Road.” This phenomenon is not limited to the big screen as television is also following this trend. Some of examples include “Fuller House,” “Roseanne,” “X- Files,” and “Arrested Development.” Why is there a growing trend of remaking things that have already been done? While there is undoubtedly a plethora of reasons to explain this, the common denominator for most of these instances is nostalgia.
Nostalgia is something that ebbs and flows throughout time. There are periods in history where a wave of nostalgia seemingly dominates the people. We are living in a time where nostalgia is rampant yet again. Given that nostalgia is the common denominator in most of these films, there is one question I have to ask myself: Is nostalgia the true driver for the creation of these adaptations, spin-offs and remakes? Or perhaps is it something else? Given the formulaic nature of many of these films I would hypothesize that it is indeed something else.
Nostalgia is a relaxer, an anesthetic, that numbs people of the experience that they are about to receive. They are put in a trance, seemingly paralyzed by the powerful effects of nostalgia. Thus, what they are currently experiencing is irrelevant, so long as euphoria of nostalgia remains. The various limitations and faults of a film are often times overshadowed or at least partially obstructed by nostalgia. A lack of originality can be effectively masked under the guise of nostalgia. Therefore, the severe famine of creativity that plagues the vast majority of Hollywood is allowed to effectively metastasize.
Relying solely on the past will not yield revolutionary change or innovation. The past can undoubtedly lead to innovation and inspiration, such as the case with The Renaissance of Europe. Yet, even then, the great pioneers during that time were not afraid to deviate from the past and experiment and innovate.
Perhaps, when this high tide of nostalgia finally recedes, the world of cinema will be exposed to brilliant filmmakers that no longer adhere to the precedence of the past nor will they be unnerved by the possibility of taking risks. The idea of innovation and change will not frighten these filmmakers. Currently, there are already a few of these pioneers and with their efforts, perhaps cinema can finally be free of the immense reliance of the past.
