Cinema Creativity Struggle
Price of one movie ticket… seven dollars. A pint of snuck in Ben & Jerry’s Half Baked… three dollars. A jumbo-sized Sprite from the concession stands… four dollars. Wasting two hours of your life in a terrible movie- price-full! In 2006, a record breaking 9.4 billion dollars worth of tickets were sold at the box office, so it’s safe to say that movies are a huge part of American culture and a huge chunk out of our wallets and pay checks every year. (Chye, 2006, para. 8).
Unfortunately many of these new movies have no value-- no complex scripts or characters, no remarkable cinematography, and no quotes that are universally remembered or quoted. Some may disagree with me and enjoy the entertainment value of these types of movies or think value is measured by the money that the film generates. I, on the other hand, strongly believe that creativity in scripts has been replaced by an increase in sequels, remakes, spoofs, and adaptations to books in order to make an easy profit; therefore, movie viewers should stop wasting money on such films to show the film industry a need for films with real substance.
There were many great movies produced and released last year, including such Oscar winners as Pan’s Labyrinth, The Last King of Scotland, and Letters From Iwo Jima. Among these must-sees, were many flops such as RV, Aquamarine, Scary Movie 4, and When a Stranger Calls. Films like these make me wonder: where did the plot go? What happened to movies with real conflicts? Characters with depth? Movie lines that make you feel good? I’m talking about lines like “here’s lookin’ at you kid” not “give me your tots.” I watch a lot of older movies such as An Affair to Remember, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Love Story, and Casa Blanca. I also watch a lot of award-winning films made in more recent years: Forest Gump, Gladiator, Last Samurai, and A Beautiful Mind. After watching these films that are beautifully written, with quotes that make you think, characters that have depth, and cinematography that is awe-inspiring and masterfully done, it disappoints me to watch movies released more recently that lack these key elements. The question comes down to why these elements have been increasingly left out of these films and what can we do to fix these problems. We want to relive the days of Humphrey Bogart, Fred Astaire, and Cary Grant where characters had depth, scripts were unique, and cinematography showed a care for the art of the film.
“Throughout much of 2005, Hollywood fretted and the media raised the alarms as national box office grosses declined nearly six percent from the previous year…. But a rally that carried into 2006 began in November of 2005, when a number of high-profile movies, beginning with Goblet of Fire and continuing through The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and King Kong, broke through and began attracting audiences en masse.” (Kilday, 2006, para 7,9). All of these movies that raised profits are either books made into movies or remakes of previously released films. Another example of this goes back to the sequel to Pirates of the Caribbean: The Black Pearl, Dead Man’s Chest, which had an “opening weekend of $135.6 million” (Kilday, 2006, para. 3). Sadly, though, unique and creatively made films like Tsotsi, Take the Lead, Akeelah and the Bee, and Goal! The Dream Begins contributed little to the overall high profits but were beautifully made films.
The Pirates sequel is not the only sequel that the film industry is turning to in order to raise profits. “This year, there were five direct sequels in the top twenty as well as two series re-launches… In addition to Dead Man’s Chest this year’s select class of $200-million plus winners includes X-Men: The Last Stand ($234.4 million), The Da Vinci Code ($217.5 million),and Superman Returns” ($200.1 million)” (Patterson, 2006, para. 6, 8). This list includes two sequels and a book made adapted to the screen. These movies are the highest earners and Hollywood knows and thrives off of that. With these movies becoming so lucrative, it is no wonder that 2007 is known as the “season of sequels”, as journalist Alex Silber (2006) tells us, with Ocean’s 13, Pirates 3, Shrek the Third, and the final film in the Bourne trilogy heading ticket sales this summer. Hollywood is after our money and knows that they can get at it with something as simple as another sequel depicting what Keenan (2006) described as Hollywood “failing itself” in order to put money in the bank (para. 13).
There is a great example of this fall from originality and creativity in the Sundance Festival that occurs every year in Park City, Utah. This annual “… fest used to discover original minds,” but now the “films are way too cozy” (Corliss, 2007, para. 5).
Film journalist Richard Corliss (2007) tells us that “there was no need to be cautious, since Indie films were rarely hits. But as Sundance became the showcase for a form of movie gaining marketplace pull, young directors naturally made films to fit the new mold” (para. 7). With movies like Napolean Dynamite, Little Miss Sunshine, and The Squid coming from Sundance and becoming huge successes in ticket and DVD sales, other directors are changing the movies that they make to send to the festival in order to get the same success. Originality is being compromised in order for “success” at the box office.
Unfortunately many of these new movies have no value-- no complex scripts or characters, no remarkable cinematography, and no quotes that are universally remembered or quoted. Some may disagree with me and enjoy the entertainment value of these types of movies or think value is measured by the money that the film generates. I, on the other hand, strongly believe that creativity in scripts has been replaced by an increase in sequels, remakes, spoofs, and adaptations to books in order to make an easy profit; therefore, movie viewers should stop wasting money on such films to show the film industry a need for films with real substance.
There were many great movies produced and released last year, including such Oscar winners as Pan’s Labyrinth, The Last King of Scotland, and Letters From Iwo Jima. Among these must-sees, were many flops such as RV, Aquamarine, Scary Movie 4, and When a Stranger Calls. Films like these make me wonder: where did the plot go? What happened to movies with real conflicts? Characters with depth? Movie lines that make you feel good? I’m talking about lines like “here’s lookin’ at you kid” not “give me your tots.” I watch a lot of older movies such as An Affair to Remember, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Love Story, and Casa Blanca. I also watch a lot of award-winning films made in more recent years: Forest Gump, Gladiator, Last Samurai, and A Beautiful Mind. After watching these films that are beautifully written, with quotes that make you think, characters that have depth, and cinematography that is awe-inspiring and masterfully done, it disappoints me to watch movies released more recently that lack these key elements. The question comes down to why these elements have been increasingly left out of these films and what can we do to fix these problems. We want to relive the days of Humphrey Bogart, Fred Astaire, and Cary Grant where characters had depth, scripts were unique, and cinematography showed a care for the art of the film.
“Throughout much of 2005, Hollywood fretted and the media raised the alarms as national box office grosses declined nearly six percent from the previous year…. But a rally that carried into 2006 began in November of 2005, when a number of high-profile movies, beginning with Goblet of Fire and continuing through The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and King Kong, broke through and began attracting audiences en masse.” (Kilday, 2006, para 7,9). All of these movies that raised profits are either books made into movies or remakes of previously released films. Another example of this goes back to the sequel to Pirates of the Caribbean: The Black Pearl, Dead Man’s Chest, which had an “opening weekend of $135.6 million” (Kilday, 2006, para. 3). Sadly, though, unique and creatively made films like Tsotsi, Take the Lead, Akeelah and the Bee, and Goal! The Dream Begins contributed little to the overall high profits but were beautifully made films.
The Pirates sequel is not the only sequel that the film industry is turning to in order to raise profits. “This year, there were five direct sequels in the top twenty as well as two series re-launches… In addition to Dead Man’s Chest this year’s select class of $200-million plus winners includes X-Men: The Last Stand ($234.4 million), The Da Vinci Code ($217.5 million),and Superman Returns” ($200.1 million)” (Patterson, 2006, para. 6, 8). This list includes two sequels and a book made adapted to the screen. These movies are the highest earners and Hollywood knows and thrives off of that. With these movies becoming so lucrative, it is no wonder that 2007 is known as the “season of sequels”, as journalist Alex Silber (2006) tells us, with Ocean’s 13, Pirates 3, Shrek the Third, and the final film in the Bourne trilogy heading ticket sales this summer. Hollywood is after our money and knows that they can get at it with something as simple as another sequel depicting what Keenan (2006) described as Hollywood “failing itself” in order to put money in the bank (para. 13).
There is a great example of this fall from originality and creativity in the Sundance Festival that occurs every year in Park City, Utah. This annual “… fest used to discover original minds,” but now the “films are way too cozy” (Corliss, 2007, para. 5).
Film journalist Richard Corliss (2007) tells us that “there was no need to be cautious, since Indie films were rarely hits. But as Sundance became the showcase for a form of movie gaining marketplace pull, young directors naturally made films to fit the new mold” (para. 7). With movies like Napolean Dynamite, Little Miss Sunshine, and The Squid coming from Sundance and becoming huge successes in ticket and DVD sales, other directors are changing the movies that they make to send to the festival in order to get the same success. Originality is being compromised in order for “success” at the box office.
Not all sequels, remakes, adaptations, and spoofs are lacking in originality. Originality can take place with these movies. This year’s Oscar winner for Best Picture was The Departed, directed by Martin Scorsese. The story line is from another movie that had been produced in Japan, Infernal Affairs. “In early interviews following the release of The Departed, Scorsese made it clear he hadn’t watched Infernal Affairs because he wanted to keep his pure vision” (Pevere, 2007, para. 17). At a close look at both movies, there are many similarities, but in general the movies are very different from each other. Scorsese was able to make the remake into a movie that could completely stand on its own and be considered original. This can happen with sequels, too. Take such examples as Shrek 2 or Toy Story: 2 that had story lines and scripts that could stand by itself without the first one.
Last year, Epic Movie hit theatres as a spoof off of many other hit movies. It was apparent that the film was “attempting to compensate for its own lack of originality and humor… With the flimsiest of story lines, the film is more spliced together mimicry” (Coyle, 2007, para. 1,2). This is a movie that was put together to get ticket sales, not like the old spoofs that used to hit theatre6s, such as “Airplane! and Naked Gun which make you forget what they [are] spoofing by making the material their own” (Coyle, 2007, para. 12). I was never a big fan of the Scary Movie trilogies, because when the spoofs of movies are taken out, there is nothing left to the movie. On the other hand, Airplane! can hold its own and is a movie that is still talked about and quoted. It was years after I had seen it that I even found out that it was just a spoof of other movies. This shows that originality is possible in these types of movies when filmmakers take the time to make the movies of good quality. It is possible to keep creativity in media, but the movie makers need to take the time to do so. It can’t just be about money, and we need to stop sending signs that we want these big-budget no-value films.
It’s about time that Hollywood got in touch with its roots. Screenplay analyst Sam Thomas (1986) argues that “if the ultimate film is to have any significant content, throwing some new glint of life on life, it is the writer who will have to create it” (p. 2).” We need a call to screenwriters who will write creative, original, and interesting screenplays. Filmmaking should revert to the days when the value of a film was measured by its creativity, with well-written scripts, rather than by the profits it generated. When this is done, it won’t be sloppily thrown together sequels, spoofs, remakes, or adaptations that make headlines in media, but films that are beautifully done and take courage to release to the public in hopes of connecting with the audience on some level. To do this, the movie-going public must send the sign to producers that the movies that will be successful are not ones that are considered easy to make or lacking in creativity. Put value where value belongs and the product will be a copiousness of creativity.
References
Chye, George Lim Heng (2006).All the movies are about sex and violence. Time for censors to act. The Straits Times (Singapore).
Childress, Kelsey (2007).Movie remakes don't match up. Kansas State Collegian via U-Wire.
Corliss, Richard (2007).Sundance Movies Are Bad For You. Time International. 169, 54.
Coyle, Jake (2007).'Epic Movie' strings together movie mimicry with little creativity. The Associated Press.
Keenan, John (2006).Newest 'Chainsaw' cuts out originality. Omaha World.
Kilday, Gregg (2006).'Pirates' helps push '06 tally up 5 percent to $9.42 bil. VNU Entertainment News Wire.
Krevolin, Richard (2003). How to Adapt Anything Into A Screenplay. Huboken, New Jersey: John Willey & Sons, Inc.
Lupack, Barbara Tepa (1994). Take Two: Adapting the ContemporaryAmerican Novel to Fiction. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press.
Martin, Sara (2000). Classics Across the Film/Literature Divide. London, England: Pluto Press.
Neill, Rosemary (2007).There's something about Jane- Why everybody loves Austen- IT'S JANE AGAIN!. Weekend Australian. 1.
Patterson, John (2006).If only... there were more Charlie Kaufmans. The Guardian. 26, 15.
Pevere, Geoff (2007).When A Master Does A Remake. The Toronto Star. C03.
Silber, Alex (2006).Prequels, sequels and remakes. Massachusetts Daily Collegian .
Thomas, Sam (1986). Best American Screenplays. New York, NY: Crown Publishers Inc.
Last year, Epic Movie hit theatres as a spoof off of many other hit movies. It was apparent that the film was “attempting to compensate for its own lack of originality and humor… With the flimsiest of story lines, the film is more spliced together mimicry” (Coyle, 2007, para. 1,2). This is a movie that was put together to get ticket sales, not like the old spoofs that used to hit theatre6s, such as “Airplane! and Naked Gun which make you forget what they [are] spoofing by making the material their own” (Coyle, 2007, para. 12). I was never a big fan of the Scary Movie trilogies, because when the spoofs of movies are taken out, there is nothing left to the movie. On the other hand, Airplane! can hold its own and is a movie that is still talked about and quoted. It was years after I had seen it that I even found out that it was just a spoof of other movies. This shows that originality is possible in these types of movies when filmmakers take the time to make the movies of good quality. It is possible to keep creativity in media, but the movie makers need to take the time to do so. It can’t just be about money, and we need to stop sending signs that we want these big-budget no-value films.
It’s about time that Hollywood got in touch with its roots. Screenplay analyst Sam Thomas (1986) argues that “if the ultimate film is to have any significant content, throwing some new glint of life on life, it is the writer who will have to create it” (p. 2).” We need a call to screenwriters who will write creative, original, and interesting screenplays. Filmmaking should revert to the days when the value of a film was measured by its creativity, with well-written scripts, rather than by the profits it generated. When this is done, it won’t be sloppily thrown together sequels, spoofs, remakes, or adaptations that make headlines in media, but films that are beautifully done and take courage to release to the public in hopes of connecting with the audience on some level. To do this, the movie-going public must send the sign to producers that the movies that will be successful are not ones that are considered easy to make or lacking in creativity. Put value where value belongs and the product will be a copiousness of creativity.
References
Chye, George Lim Heng (2006).All the movies are about sex and violence. Time for censors to act. The Straits Times (Singapore).
Childress, Kelsey (2007).Movie remakes don't match up. Kansas State Collegian via U-Wire.
Corliss, Richard (2007).Sundance Movies Are Bad For You. Time International. 169, 54.
Coyle, Jake (2007).'Epic Movie' strings together movie mimicry with little creativity. The Associated Press.
Keenan, John (2006).Newest 'Chainsaw' cuts out originality. Omaha World.
Kilday, Gregg (2006).'Pirates' helps push '06 tally up 5 percent to $9.42 bil. VNU Entertainment News Wire.
Krevolin, Richard (2003). How to Adapt Anything Into A Screenplay. Huboken, New Jersey: John Willey & Sons, Inc.
Lupack, Barbara Tepa (1994). Take Two: Adapting the ContemporaryAmerican Novel to Fiction. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press.
Martin, Sara (2000). Classics Across the Film/Literature Divide. London, England: Pluto Press.
Neill, Rosemary (2007).There's something about Jane- Why everybody loves Austen- IT'S JANE AGAIN!. Weekend Australian. 1.
Patterson, John (2006).If only... there were more Charlie Kaufmans. The Guardian. 26, 15.
Pevere, Geoff (2007).When A Master Does A Remake. The Toronto Star. C03.
Silber, Alex (2006).Prequels, sequels and remakes. Massachusetts Daily Collegian .
Thomas, Sam (1986). Best American Screenplays. New York, NY: Crown Publishers Inc.
