“Another remake!! Is Hollywood out of original ideas?”
The usual question popped up after a slew of reboots were announced over the past couples of months. There’s a Harry Potter reboot, a Spy Kids remake, a Hunger Games prequel, a Magnificent Seven remake (again?) and the weirdest of them all, a live-action Moana remake (why?). That’s not to mention the countless sequels and spinoffs in different franchises.
While it might make sense to put adaptations of video games and novels in the same boat, adapting a piece of fiction from one medium to another takes skill. Also, people who’ve never experienced the story in the original medium will get to experience the story (eg) The Last of Us, The Lord of the Rings etc.
While Hollywood has been whacked by this particular question time and time again, the current crop of announcements by the major studios does require some study.
What explains this current deluge of remakes/reboots?
Remakes Ain’t No New Thing
Hollywood doing reboots or remakes isn’t a new thing. Steven Soderbergh’s “Ocean’s Eleven” was a remake of a 60’s Sinatra flick. There was that ill-advised Psycho remake by Gus Van Sant. Disney’s lineup of movies since the 2010’s has been either an MCU movie or a live-action remake of their beloved animated classics. Sony rebooted their Spider-Man franchise with 2012’s “The Amazing Spider Man” when the last Spider Man movie came out only in 2007. “The Magnificent Seven” was a remake of Akira Kurosawa’s iconic Seven Samurai. The list goes on.
You could make the case that those remakes were bringing old stories to a new audience. As much as I loathe Disney’s live-action remakes of their animated classics, they are bringing old stories in a new format to a new generation (and making boatloads of money while cashing on the nostalgia of an older generation). Some of them like Mulan even tried to tell a different story from the original. Even in the case of The Magnificent Seven, not a lot of people would have watched Seven Samurai in its heyday, so it made sense.
But for the past few years, the release of original movies has been reduced to a trickle.
Who was asking for a live action Moana remake (Other than The Rock, of course)? It was released in 2016 for crying out loud!!!
Studios have always been risk-averse. I can’t blame them. They’re in the business of making money. They could care less if the property in question is a high brow movie or the umpteenth attempt at franchise dreck. Between the ambitious attempt at redefining cinema that might flop or the bankable nth installment of a popular franchise, studios will inevitably choose the latter. Such is the nature of business.
Risk Aversion
There was a time that studios were pretty open (within reason) to bankroll any movie, whether it be an action blockbuster or an arthouse flick.
But the past few years have seen studios become extremely risk averse. Unless it’s from a bankable franchise or a bankable star/director, none of the big studios are willing to bankroll an original movie or a movie with a crazy, high-brow concept. Nowadays, A24 is about the only famous game in town for bankrolling indie flicks with a considerable amount of publicity.
It’s easy to blame the audience and call it a day. But Christopher Nolan’s movies, barring the Dark Knight trilogy, have been original stuff and they make money. John Wick started out as a mid-budget action movie and evolved into one of the best action franchises of all time. Last year’s “Top Gun: Maverick” made massive piles of money and made the audience, studio and movie theatres happy. “Everything Everywhere All At Once” made solid business from good word of mouth. So, while the audience might drift towards the familiar, give them a well crafted original movie and they will celebrate that as well.
It’s one of the reasons directors like Christopher Nolan or Denis Villeneuve are celebrated. They’re one of the few directors who can command massive budgets and solid day one crowds for original IPs.
So, what gives?
COVID-19 changed a lot of stuff.
How we learned to love streaming during the pandemic
Even before the pandemic hit the world, a trip to the movies was becoming incredibly expensive. And that’s not even adding the astronomical cost of the snacks. When a single trip to a movie theatre puts a hole in your bank balance, the audience will obviously be picky about the movies they want to watch in a theatre. This unfortunately means that the safest choice would be a recognizable IP or one with massive star power that’s marketed to the moon and back.
The post COVID landscape bought about some changes. A lot of it related to streaming.
Due to COVID restrictions, none of the theatres could show any movies. In order to clear up the backlog and shore up some extra subscriptions, some of the major studios, most notably, Warner Bros started releasing their movies day and date of the theatrical release. In some cases, movies meant for a theatrical release were dumped straight to streaming. Something that all streaming services did in unison was streaming the movies within weeks of it’s theatrical release. Before, it used to take months for a movie to wind up on a streaming service. This one decision I’d say really changed audience habits.
Trips to the theatre were already getting costly. The economic conditions aren’t exactly stable either. So when you find out that the movie you might interested in will release in 6 weeks on a streaming service, the choice between the theatre and the comfort of your own home becomes that much easier to make. Unlike the mediocre TVs of yore, TVs and sound systems have advanced to the point that you won’t miss out on much from watching a movie at home.
This, unfortunately, ends up hurting original movies more than the franchise movies. Before, there were DVD sales to say whether a movie was actually good. DVD sales was what made “The Shawshank Redemption” from a commercial failure to one of the most beloved movies of all time. But streaming metrics are less straightforward. So you can’t gleam any meaningful data from it.
But studios make a bulk of their profits from theatrical releases. Streaming doesn’t help them much in that regard. They need butts in seats. So what do they do?
Remake. Reboot. Repeat.
Sure, you might not come to the theatre for a new original movie. How about a slightly rejigged version of a movie that made your childhood with a fresh coat of paint? You can even bring your kids for the ride! They will experience the same happiness that you did as a kid. Probably.
It’s not all doom & gloom for the Hollywood audience.
While there are far too many remakes and reboots announced, it’s not like original movies aren’t releasing at all. If all else fails, there’s a wide, colorful world called international cinema. All most of you have to do is overcome the subtitle barrier and you will treated to stories from nations far and wide. Besides, there’s also the possibility of these remakes and reboots failing critically and commercially. This could prompt the studios to bankroll original, fresh content. (Not possible, but one can dream)
Until then, keep an eye out for another remake.