Fellow sheep, unite. If you're just as tired as I am of being funnel-fed God-awful amounts of tripe that seem remarkably similar to something you've seen before, brother, is this the article for you. It seems like Hollywood becomes less and less original, and more and more incestuous with every passing year. What isn't a direct sequel is often a knockoff of a previous year's successful venture (and don't think a film about the Andrea Doria isn't in the works somewhere in a studio board room). And if that weren't enough, there's more cross contamination than the L.A. forensics lab. New movies become new TV shows and old TV shows become new movies. We have become stranded in an entertainment wasteland and have resorted to cannibalism.
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then this is the biggest collection of sycophants and suck ups since the reign of Charles I (for the unitiated they're the inventors of the "Cavalier" attitude). Also, if we get upset with people who repeat themselves, why do we reward them when they repeat someone else? This does an incredible disservice to the original thinker, especially in television where runs of shows overlap, because after being inundated with fifteen of the same thing we forget it ever was an original idea or who had it first. Doubt me? Without looking it up, who was first, Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplain, or the Keystone Cops? Laurel & Hardy, the Three Stooges, or the Marx Brothers? Ozzie & Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, or Make Room for Daddy? I Love Lucy, the Dick Van Dyke Show, or the Honeymooners? My Three Sons, The Courtship of Eddie's Father, or Family Affair? The Brady Bunch or the Partridge Family? The Munsters or the Aadams Family? Gilligan's Island or F-Troop? I think you get the point.
The thing that's interesting to note about these examples is that the shows, despite being similar were memorable by themselves because they grew out of their knockoff seeds. One prime example of this is a show spawned from a movie, M*A*S*H. In it's early incarnation it actually bore more of a resemblance to Hogan's Heroes than the movie that inspired it. The madcap antics of a bunch of Army doctors who always came out on top were replaced by characters who had a sense of humor forced to make difficult decisions, often facing unwinnable situations. In an early episode, the characters were confronted by an officer who wanted a patient patched up just so he could be sent off to certain death, and the doctors outsmarted him. Facing a similar situation, later in the series, all their efforts went for naught as the patient shouted something in Korean just before being taken away, which was interpreted by the officer as being an open admission of hostility towards the doctors. What had been an amusing romp in a previous incarnation, was turned into a poignant moment to reflect on sympathy, allegiance, betrayal and lost causes. Much as I hate to admit it, I enjoyed the early episodes more, but I probably got more out of the later ones.
Unfortunately, for every time a show pulls this off, there are a dozen that either fail, never get a chance, or never even try to outgrow their roots. Within the teen comedy genre, there are countless examples of each type. A film like "Can't Hardly Wait," in my opinion, tried and failed to grow out of the roots of its genre. "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure" seemed like it wanted to say something, but was too weighted down with idiocy to come to the surface. Then there's films like "Summer School." They don't have much to say, but they go on for ninety minutes, not even saying that.
It's almost a comedy unto itself to see how studio's will try to dress up an idea to make it appear new, when it is completely derived from another film. For my example, I'll use Tootsie, which is actually derived from "Some Like It Hot," but the time frames are far enough apart that we can actually say it was inspired by, not copied from that film. From this you got "He's My Girl" (African-American Tootsie), "Her Life as a Man" (reverse Tootsie), "Soul Man" (racially-based Tootsie), "Just One of the Girls" (younger Tootsie), "Just One of the Guys" (younger reversed Tootsie), and so on. Now ask yourself exactly how memorable any of these were. If it weren't for Comedy Central and E! needing to fill out their programming schedules, would any prints of these films still exist?
Of course, originality is all relative. I have heard it said that there are seven basic plots that all literature falls into with only slight variations (although exactly what those seven are continues to elude me). When you take the thousands of books, movies, television shows, and plays that come out every year and divide them by seven, you get an inkling of exactly how hard it is to be truly original. To be unique, a work would have to defy categorization, and how many can you name that don't fit under one or more genres? Even a film that I liked very much, and was considered by many to be difficult to classify had something of a precedent. I thoroughly enjoyed "Forrest Gump," but the constant interactions with famous people in Historical footage, reminded me of "Zelig." I guess what I'm driving at is that while plot lines, and gimmicks and characters may be similar, the most important thing that must be somehow unique is the message. The story must have something to say that we haven't heard a million times before.
A film that I enjoyed very much, that has spawned successful sequels, which until recently I struggled to figure out why I enjoyed less than the original, was "Lethal Weapon." I had always found the sequels less satisfying with some kind of rationalization about how the villains weren't as charismatic, or the structure of the plot (such as it was) left some very negative elements too close to the end, or the heroes became less lethal, needing more help from added characters. What finally hit me just recently was that the first film was not about the conflict between the police and the criminals; it was about the conflict between Riggs and Murtaugh. All the action was just a vehicle that forced the two to interact. In the end, that conflict was resolved and nothing more needed to be said. What has followed has been a vehicle with no one driving. There have been conflicts among the characters in the sequels, but they seem forced. They don't really need to be there, and, to be perfectly honest, they don't really need to be resolved. Annoying behavior by an informant, or sexual tension with someone in another department does not compare with one cop being partnered with another who may very well be trying to kill himself, and might not mind taking you out in the process. This is a situation that can not stay the way it is, but how can you resolve it without betraying a brother officer, which might set him off and blacklist you within the department? All the sequels seem to say is, "it oughta be good for another few million on the opening weekend, if nothing else." This being said, I'll probably be seeing "Lethal Weapon 4" this weekend. Oh well, in the words of my people, "Baaaaaaaa."
