Cinematic Groundhog Day
Like all things in this world, the crucifixion of creativity in modern cinema started with a money problem. Supersized productions, rising special effects costs, the scarcity of expensive physical film, and over-budget locations, have exponentially increased the cost of filmmaking. The Guardian’s culture journalist Catherine Shoard points out that this explosion of upfront costs makes “risky” stories less enticing to the investors. Simultaneously, with the influx of streaming services, improved home theaters, and rising ticket prices, carving out an afternoon to go watch a movie in the theater became relatively obsolete. This widened the gap of cinematic risk and financial reward. Since the film industry tallies a movie’s overall success with box-office sales, suddenly the suit-wearing investors and the financial backers of any new film became skeptics instead of supporters.
Rather than financially supporting the hair-brained, yet creative, ideas of fresh-faced directors, new movie ideas are being shut down in their infancy. “Studios today are so risk-adverse,” says Shoard. “This is an industry in freefall, clutching at the surest things in sight as it scrabbles to regain footing.” If James Cameron had pitched Avatar (2009) nowadays, the movie scripts would never have made it onto the desk of an executive producer. There’s no way they would take a $237 million dollar risk on some movie about a paraplegic ex-marine who miraculously becomes an environmentalist alien on a faraway planet. It would be farfetched.
Instead of throwing money at new ideas and taking a risk, Hollywood has collectively decided to take the safe path, recreating movies they are sure will strike a cord of nostalgia or capture the attention of increasingly fleeting audiences. Valeria Santos Rocca, a student journalist from the UMass Connector Newspaper, calls out cinema’s sorry attempt at reigniting cinematic intrigue, claiming every “new” movie feels like déjà vu. While Rocca admits the younger generation’s “TikTok brain” is partially to blame for the decline of movie ticket sales, it’s more importantly due to the unoriginality of new releases because boredom-inducing studios get stuck on repeat. If people wanted to watch the beloved film Jurassic Park (1993), they would go watch Jurassic Park; we don’t need a 2025 version of a movie we’ve already seen before.
Via u/WeiserchGT
It can be scary going out on a limb, but after years of cinematic déjà vu, audiences are tired of rewatching the same movies over-and-over again. We want something fresh, creative, new and interesting, not another tired reboot of a movie we’ve already enjoyed.
Releases on Repeat
Dreamworks animation studios released How to Train Your Dragon in 2010 and audiences loved it. It was an extremely original idea, it was critically acclaimed, and for many, it reignited their love for fantasy, nordic lore, and underdog stories. As a result, the studio released two follow-up sequels to ride the coattails of the original’s success, and despite promising a fourth sequel sometime in 2027, none of those movies were as revered as the original. That’s already too many subpar sequels, in my opinion, but to capitalize even further, the studio went another step farther, giving us something none of us asked for: A live-action remake of the exact same story.
While the live-action movie, released earlier this year, grossed more money than expected in the box office, this is a classic example of oversaturation of an original franchise idea. In only 15 years, norse dragons have completely enveloped our release radar and they’re not the only studios copycatting their success in multiples. Because of that, it’s no wonder we feel like we’re living in a cinematic groundhog day.
It’s understandable that studios want to financially support the ideas that are guaranteed to succeed in the box office, tickling the recognition of audiences and giving viewers the comfort of knowing what to expect. However, in a way, this model is capping creativity and staunching the talents of filmmakers, actors, writers, cinematographers, and everyone else involved in the movie-making process. Instead of making 20-year-old remakes of original movies like Freaky Friday (2003) and The Devil Wears Prada (2006), masterpieces that were beloved for their ingenuity and exquisite production, Hollywood needs to learn to take risks again.
Via u/giphy
If stockholders, financial backers, producers, and studios are going to continue to insist on keeping their investments boring and safe, perhaps instead of remaking cherished movies that we already know and love, they should consider putting the industry’s talent and creativity to the test by remaking the bad movies. For example, the original Planet of the Apes (1968) movie was an intriguing concept but lacked the technology and the SFX makeup skills to fully immerse the audience into a dramatic story. Hollywood tried its hand at remaking this original idea several times (in 1970 and 2001), only to land a bullseye a three-part trilogy starting with Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011). Proving that the idea itself was incredible, but the portrayal was the problem, the Planet of the Apes franchise was wildly successful after it was finally done correctly.
Via u/RemindWorld
There’s a whole slew of poorly-received movies out there that stemmed from a good idea, Hollywood just needs to be reminded that good movie-making starts with an amazing idea and finishes with incredible production—and you need both to captivate an audience. Cutting corners by fixating on franchises with proven success only fosters audience comparisons, boredom, and ultimately another catalog of yawn-worthy releases.
Via u/Konstantin
Producers must recognize the power of original storytelling, reminding themselves that cinema and filmmaking is more than just a money-making machine, but an expression of artistry and a pillar of humanity’s story-driven upbringing. Yet, when it comes to money matters, audiences and creatives are only privy to the opportunities that present themselves.
So if Hollywood must capitalize on remakes, perhaps they would see more success from retelling tales that were good at their core, but lacked the production value to truly take off. While it’s not entirely original, it’s also not a complete risk for the financial backers, offering a win-win for the pre and post production teams, and giving audiences something new to watch for a change.