Recently in “Hollyweird” there’s been a huge push for remakes of films that seem a little too recent to bring back. As of this writing, they’re in the middle of redoing “RoboCop”@@http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1234721/@@ and this summer just released another “Total Recall” film@@http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1386703/@@, both originals directed by Paul Verhoeven. “The Amazing Spider-Man” just came out@@http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/@@, when Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films came out within the last 10 years (five years since Spider-Man 3). We have another “Dirty Dancing.” We have another “Footloose.” We have another “Red Dawn.” Why the sudden push for all these remakes, many of them from the ’80s?
Hollywood has a job to churn out movies. But when they do, they’re also starting franchises: video games, toys, clothing lines and place mats. It’s shocking how much in the way of natural resources are spent on useless plastic crap that McDonald’s puts in their happy meals surrounding some new cinema extravaganza.
Very rarely are chances taken, and from the standpoint of those who gamble millions of dollars on film releases, the prospect of a huge risk isn’t very appealing.
But if risks aren’t taken, you don’t get films like “Inception” or “Looper,” or films that may hold themselves in our collective unconscious longer because they were genuinely good.
I’m not saying that anything derivative is a bad idea, but what I am saying is that cinema is an art form, and we’re moved by a strong story. When a film touches us, it lives forever. Everything else is just business.