FC NOW: The Fast Company Weblog
May 31, 2005
Remake Reality
When I saw 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' not too long ago, eight trailers preceded it. Four of those, exactly half, were for remakes. Some of those are nostalgic classics, 'Herbie' and 'The Bad News Bears.' Others have a cult following, 'House of Wax,' for instance. This morning I read about a new version of 'The Wicker Man.' The original is a perfect, creepy piece of film. Why bother remaking it?
As usual in this world, it comes down to money. Remakes pose less risk for the studios than an original product. The concept has already proven to be successful and a new iteration has a built-in audience because of fans of the first one. Most of the time businesses will go with the sure thing, the certain bit of profit, than be bold and create something new. Innovation is more of a risk, but has a potential for greatness. And we all could use less of the same and more of actual innovation.
How do you feel about remaking films? What about retreading business practices?
Posted by Kevin Ohannessian at May 31, 2005 10:56 AM | Category: arts + entertainment |
5 Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
FC NOW MENU
NEWSLETTERS
FC NOW CATEGORIES
FC READS
Film remakes are an interesting phenomenon which frequently disappoint.
Maybe that is because many "older" people remember them the first time around as a much better effort with more creativity and impact.
The "Italian Job" springs to mind and it may be to do with Hollywood (in most cases) working to a dumbed down formula that they expect will get people back to compare in the first instance and later leave the cinema with buyer's remorse.
A cheap way to make a buck, and at some stage unsustainable as the ideas are milked and diluted.
One might ask where are the new ideas - even the previous Rocky 3 - 20, Terminator comes back again and again are rehashes of the same story with different effects - or is innovation too risky in present day America with its current socio political drift?
In terms of business practices - now arguably they have been recycled time and time again - and a number of the "gurus" reinvent themselves every few years with a minor tweak to their previous good idea or an incremental development of someone else's work.
In this area some of Tom Peter's thoughts about reinvention may be pertinent.
And how about remakes from japan in films, and uk in t.v.?
Good remakes should be called reinterpretations. Because it's only when you bring a new viewpoint to the table that something truly interesting can happen. On top of that, if all we did was produce surefire remakes, we'd run out of originals to remake in the first place. Yet the Batman story has been reinterpreted in book/comic/TV/film formats so many times and yet remains fresh.
It's all reinvention. DVD players are reinvented enhanced VHS players. TIVO/DVR is a reinvented video cassette recorder. As technology (and perhaps more importantly prevailing thought regarding "how things work") moves forward, it's only natural to revisit current, long-standing products, services, delivery channels...even movies and apply what we've learned in the interim. The best performing companies that came out of the internet fanaticism of the mid 90's were copycats, version 2.0 of of something far less "cool", i.e., today = ebay, yesterday = musty auctionhouse.
Reinvention, taking a concept and lacing it with what's new, is innovation...not everyone can do it and even less can do it well.
I would disagree with the assertion that the DVD is merely a remake of VCR. A VCR tape had a film with a few trailers before it. DVDs have multiple languages, subtitles, commentaries, deleted scenes, documentaries, and less used features such as multiple angles. If it was only an improved picture and sound, DVD would not have been a success. All of DVD's added content and options makes it innovative, not rehash.