Is it really a lack of ideas?

[EZM22]

I was reading a local movie blog this morning where they reported the news that Kate Bosworth was going to be starring in a film adaptation of a Paulo Coehlo novel. The article finished by complaining that Hollywood had "officially run out of ideas" (By the way, this is a webpage that I visit regularly and that always bitches and moans about EVERYTHING done in Hollywood).

I started wondering: is adapting a book really a sign that a studio has no original ideas? I don't see anything wrong with it, some books have cinematic qualities and wanting to present a good story in a different format makes sense... also, a vast majority of movies considered "classics" or "masterpieces" happen to be book adaptations... see The Godfather, To Kill a Mockingbird, Dr. Zhivago, etc. And this can also apply to foreign movies. Unless I'm mistaken, most of Francois Truffaut's films were adapted or inspired by novels.

And more recently, the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, or the Harry Potter movies which have steadily gotten better. Or the million adaptations of Stephen King novels. Granted, a lot of them suck, but there have been some good ones.

My point is, books and films can perfectly complement each other and the reason they get adapted into films is because these are stories worth telling in a visual medium. It's not because studios don't have ideas... not having original ideas is when studios pointlessly remake a movie without adding anything new, or when they make a sequel no one wants, or when they do a crappy adaptation of an old TV show that makes the old viewers realize they were watching crap all along.

That's when they run out of ideas. But books? They're always going to be around, and some of them deserve to be made into movies.

[RustyRazor]

Adapting books isn't running out of ideas.
Doing a movie that used to be a popular cartoon and needlessly making it live action is running out of ideas.
Doing a movie based around a popular television show is running out of ideas.
RE doing a movie that is considered by most to be a "classic" simply because the director wants to bring his "vision" of the story to life (AKA the studio needs ta gets paid!) is running out of ideas.

At least a book isn't any of the above.
I've got no beefs with it.

[Cop No. 633]

Damn straight... one of the movies I'm looking forward to most this year is an adaptation: No Country for Old Men. Whoever said that statement is a dumb ass for not taking the time to think about it. I think adaptations when done right can make some of the best films: Silence of the Lambs, 2001, Fight Club, Barry Lyndon, Full Metal Jacket, Jurassic Park...

What annoys me about remakes is that they've been happening for a while now, only back then, people used to be smart enough not to name the film the same title! Look at Seven Samurai and the Magnificent Seven. Now that is how remakes should be done... where you take a basic concept and flip it over to a new culture or concept. You don't photo copy another film... which is the biggest problems with modern remakes. At least Scorsese had the smarts to call his film the Departed, not Infernal Affairs... respect the past!

[EZM22]

I just thought that whoever wrote the "Hollywood's running out of ideas" bit was just complaining for the sake of complaining. Glad to see I'm not the only who disagrees.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by CosmicPuppet
At least Scorsese had the smarts to call his film the Departed, not Infernal Affairs... respect the past!


What about Cape Fear?

[Cronos]

Originally posted by RustyRazor
Adapting books isn't running out of ideas.
Doing a movie that used to be a popular cartoon and needlessly making it live action is running out of ideas.
Doing a movie based around a popular television show is running out of ideas.
RE doing a movie that is considered by most to be a "classic" simply because the director wants to bring his "vision" of the story to life (AKA the studio needs ta gets paid!) is running out of ideas.
Agreed on all of the above.

[corran horn]

Totally agree, AZM. Some of my favorite movies are based off books: LOTR, Bridge on the River Kwai, Godfather, All the President's Men, Born on the 4th of July, Syriana (loosely, though), Mystic River, Forrest Gump, etc.

The only good movie inspired by a TV series is TRAFFIC, and that was based on a BBC series (I think).

In fact, many of my most anticipatedfilms for 2007 are adaptations: American Gangster, Charlie Wilson's War, There Will Be Blood, Sweeney Todd (not a book, but still an adaptation), Reservation Road, Kite Runner, Assassination of Jesse James, etc.

[yorrick brown]

for horror movies.

ok so hollywood loves to remake movies from the 80`s ,70`s or asian movies that younger people may not have seen.

prom night
april fools day
texas chainsaw
grudge
dark water
ring
amityville
hitcher


yada yada


ok you get my idea.now i read that some fuck face a in suit(that cost so much it could feed african children for ten years) in hollywood thinks it a good idea to remake 'The Exorcist' .what the fuck !.honest i mean come on .

remaking 'the exorcist' for horror fans is like someone saying saying "hey you know what lets remake citizen kane ."

my point been the amazing novel 'the ruins' hasn`t been turned into a film and jesus you only have to walk in a bookstore to see the untapped and most of all original storys yet to be made.

i mean come on its called reading.try it some time you cocks in suits that get paid to much to do very little.

[jolanar]

hollywood isn't out of ideas. the problem is you can't fill 52 weeks a year with great movies. you need filler mediocre movies for 90% of it.

[The Postmaster General]

It seems like ancient thinking to me. Back in the GOLDEN AGE of Hollywood, there were novel adaptions gallore. Look at all the popular movies - adaptions. There were even remakes gallore.

Since that time, there have been some pretty interesting forms of media developed. There's these things called TV programs, and these other things called video games. They are sort of like books, in that the mostly have storylines and characters. So, I guess filmmakers aren't acting like storytelling stopped developing in the 40s. They are continuing to adapt more stories, just as they always have, except from more sources. If anything, you could argue that there is MORE originality in Hollywood as they are drawing from more sources.

If someone wanted to talk about death of originality, they'd be much better served doing the subject as YouTube user videos than movie adaptations.

[bigred760]

They must've been running out of ideas since the 1930s, what with Gone with the Wind and Wizard of Oz having been adapted from books. It's been happening forever, nothing new there. This blogger seems like one of those that doesn't realize that there are movies before 1990 and just wants to jump on the "Bash Hollywood" bandwagon.

[mutesaint]

I think the biggest diffeence is the amount of ino out there. In the 40's, if a remake came out nobody really knew. To know you would have had to see the original or know someobedy who had. There was no net database. Now, if someone in hollywood has a pleasant smelling fart we all know about withen a day. Doesn't mean hollywood is less original, it just means we know more about it when they aren't.

[Jerk Shapiro]

It's not a lack of ideas as much as it is a lack of $$$

[The Postmaster General]

I think the biggest diffeence is the amount of ino out there. In the 40's, if a remake came out nobody really knew. To know you would have had to see the original or know someobedy who had. There was no net database. Now, if someone in hollywood has a pleasant smelling fart we all know about withen a day. Doesn't mean hollywood is less original, it just means we know more about it when they aren't.


I this is along the right lines, however, for instance, Gone With The Wind was a pretty popular novel.

My take (in addition to what you're saying, which I think is part of it) might be that we hear about more people bitching about it. I think when you hear people complaining about stuff, it seems like there's more of that stuff than there sometimes really is. For every remake, there's like a million people who complain about it being a remake.

[john_rambo]

I just want to see an entertaining movie... i do not care if its a remake... book adaptation... sequel... whatever... i just like movies in all those different types

[EZM22]

I just want to see an entertaining movie... i do not care if its a remake... book adaptation... sequel... whatever... i just like movies in all those different types

That's what it comes down to for me... who cares if the movie is based on a book/comic/old movie/whatever or if it's from Hollywood or Iran, as long as it is entertaining.

[X-Nightcrawler]

Hollywood can't 'run out of ideas', why do people still have this notion? If they suddenly realize original ideas will make more money they'll scout for original screenplays, they just don't care about that.