How can we bring original ideas back into Hollywood?

Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
2,277
Reaction score
0
Points
31
I've been lurking around in the forums a lot, and I've seen people complain about there not being any original stories/screenplays that aren't remakes or adaptations or anything like that. Sometimes there are original movies that come out that are never noticed by the viewing public (sadly, I can't name any off the top of my head). In light of this, I feel that those of you aspiring filmmakers/writers (myself included) can bring something to the table that can turn people on their head (or however the expression is said), and (if possible) create a film studio where the director had full creative control instead of the studio taking over like they have over the last few years. Some-well actually-a lot of you will say "this is stupid" and just brush this thing off and this thread will be lost in the thousands of threads to come, but I just wanted to get that off my chest. Hopefully, a few of you will get my point.

- G.T.A.
 
They need a new shipment of Acid and Cocaine to get the minds flowing just like the 70s :D
 
Black dust is partly correct, lets be honest there is no way Lucas wasn't a pot head: "and I'm going to have Han solo's best friend be....a walking carpet" "and there will be little teddy bears that save the galaxy....EWOKS! is what they shall be named"

lame joke, okay


but I think the big problem right now (which isn't that big of a problem) is that the big franchises are superhero franchises, outside of Pirates, there really isn't a big original franchise right now, cause adaptations are the hot stuff, with Harry Potter being Midas' touch, its tough for producers to say "hey lets drop 150 on a product that has no reason to do well, instead of dropping 150 on Iron Man, or Transformers who even though they aren't as well known as Spidey or X-men, there is still a name recognition, and also the Marvel or Hasbros name" I definatley think we will start to see more in the next couple of years, in terms of original franchises, I especially think if Avatar, Prince of Persia, National Treasure 2 and Hancock do well they maybe the ressurect the original movie conecept blockbuster franchise

I am not against good adaptations by any means cause they help feed life into even the worst of movies (Daredevil) but I also wish there was a bit more originality in film right now
 
since when arent there original ideas in hollywood? there are hundreds of movies made every year, and maybe 10-20 of them are "based on..." or remakes...I dont understand these complaints at all.
 
since when arent there original ideas in hollywood? there are hundreds of movies made every year, and maybe 10-20 of them are "based on..." or remakes...I dont understand these complaints at all.

True. They market the hell out of the adaptations/remakes and give one teaser and one trailer for anything new/original.
 
since when arent there original ideas in hollywood? there are hundreds of movies made every year, and maybe 10-20 of them are "based on..." or remakes...I dont understand these complaints at all.

What he said.
 
There are original movies, you just don't choose to watch them. Or its the fact they are handed like crap by the studio's marketing teams, also possibly overshadowed by the bigger movies.
 
There are original movies, you just don't choose to watch them. Or its the fact they are handed like crap by the studio's marketing teams, also possibly overshadowed by the bigger movies.

Pretty much. I know I want to see The Nines, but am I going to make an effort to see it where and when it's available, compared to a major studio film that I can catch at any time, anywhere? Sometimes, we just don't make the effort to look out for good "original" films, and pay attention to when and where they'll be released. To say nothing of the fact that the film could still suck ass despite being so "original".
 
If people stopped watching all those lame big summer sequels Hollywood would stop making them, but that's just not going to happen.
 
this has been a good year for the movies. they are making good money. so they must be doing somehing right.
 
Maybe there are a handful of original stuff out there (No, not Tarantino original, I mean no references or anything, brand new) but you have to admit we've been getting a ridiculous amount of sequels lately.

It's over for film imo. We've done it all. there's nothing left but 3d.
 
I don't understand these complaints either. It doesn't matter if it's original or not. In the end, it's either a good movie or a bad movie. That's all that really matters.

-TNC
 
Maybe there are a handful of original stuff out there (No, not Tarantino original, I mean no references or anything, brand new) but you have to admit we've been getting a ridiculous amount of sequels lately.

It's over for film imo. We've done it all. there's nothing left but 3d.

Since the golden age of film, there have been movies (some of them considered some of the best of all-time) based on novels, comics, and anything else that wasn't a film first, ultimately became a film at one point or another.
 
Movies that interact with an audience are the way to go. There are a couple of theaters that have these types of films when an audience gets to vote on what the main character of the film gets do to. It reminds me of those Choose your own adventure books.
 
I read somewhere that FOX have got a group of screenwriters together.

* Michael Arndt (“Little Miss Sunshine”)
* Me (“Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” “Go”)
* Stuart Beattie (“Collateral”)
* Ted Elliott & Terry Rossio (“Pirates of the Caribbean,” “Shrek”)
* Derek Haas & Michael Brandt (“3:10 to Yuma”)
* Tim Herlihy (“The Wedding Singer,” “Happy Gilmore”)
* Simon Kinberg (“Mr. and Mrs. Smith,” “X-Men: The Last Stand”)
* Craig Mazin (“Scary Movie 3 and 4”), and
* Marianne & Cormac Wibberley (“National Treasure,” “National Treasure 2″)

We’re each committing to writing an original (i.e. not an adaptation) for Fox — our next original script, in fact. For it, we’ll take a greatly reduced upfront fee, in exchange for our full quotes plus first-dollar gross when the movie gets made. If the movie get made — that’s the gamble the writers are taking.

Helping to ameliorate that risk, we are producers on our projects, and can’t be rewritten except in fairly narrow circumstances. We consult on the major creative decisions (like director, stars, other producers). Lastly, if the project isn’t getting a greenlight, we have the ability to take it back in a timely fashion. 1

Note that when I say “we,” I’m referring the writers individually. There’s no group decision process. No production company. We’re each autonomous entities.

It’s in each writer’s interest to write a really commercial movie that (a) Fox will want to make, and (b) will earn a bazillion dollars.2 To me, that’s the secret of the deal. While there are protections for both sides, the key ingredient is mutual benefit. Both sides have a lot to gain from making it work.

It sounds relatively simple, but Great Zeus, it was complicated. Of all of us, Craig Mazin deserves the biggest props. If I had 10 phone calls a day about it, Craig had 30.3 It was a super-heroic effort, for which he’ll be repaid in alcohol.

And now for the backstory. The day the John Wells deal was announced, Craig called me and asked what I thought about it. I thought it sounded terrific, and so did many other writers. Craig had already had conversations with Ted Elliott about doing something with a group of screenwriters, but the Wells deal was specific and tangible. It provided a focus, a template. Within a few weeks, a group of writers met at my house on a weekend afternoon to discuss the possibilities.4

After phone calls with all of these writers’ representatives, Craig and I met with several studios, explaining why we thought the deal was good for them. There was a lot of interest from most of the studios,5 but Fox stepped up in the biggest and most enthusiastic way. To put it politely, they pursued it very aggressively. To put it less politely, they pursued it with a vigor that sometimes frightened me. But their zeal was genuine, and the deal ended up happening much more quickly than any of us anticipated, through the combined efforts of many attorneys, agents, and executives. I’m loathe to start naming names for fear of leaving off someone who worked their ass off on the deal — some at the cost of family obligations — so I’ll just extend a public thank you to all of them on both sides.

So. Will it work? Will it change anything?

I don’t know. I think it’s best to classify it as an experiment. We’re each committing to one script, so if it simply doesn’t work out, no one is particularly worse off. And it’s hard to say whether the basic idea could (or should) be expanded to include the other kinds of movies screenwriters are hired to write: adaptations, sequel, remakes, and everything else that relies on underlying property. Without the ability to take the project back, it doesn’t make a lot of sense for a writer to reduce his upfront money. Even among this group, most scripts don’t become movies. The gamble might not make sense.

What I will say is that as an A-list screenwriter, it’s become increasingly difficult to set up an original project at the studios, who (understandably) want to save their development budgets for the movies they’re pretty sure they’re going to make — largely sequels, adaptations and remakes. I’m very excited to write an original for Fox, a movie not based on anything other than what I think would be great idea. So while this deal is largely about rights and money, I think it has the potential to lead to some better, more original movies. If so, that’s a win for everyone.

http://johnaugust.com/archives/2007/the-big-fox-deal
 
How can we bring original ideas back into Hollywood?
we as just fans can't do much

now, if the majority of us, who think we are so, much more imaginative, and smarter then Hollywood, studied film, started writing movie scripts, and send them out to producers
or become movie directors, and producers ... our self in the future
then, yes, we can make a difference

Until then, we just gotta accept the generic crap, remakes, rip off of novels, and endless sequels, that Hollywood offers us :csad:
 
well thank god for james cameron.
 
When people say "Original" they mean memorable stories/characters/etc. that are created specifically for film FIRST...

When "STAR WARS" came out in 1977, sure it had references and such to mythology and that...but there was no "STAR WARS" comic book or "STAR WARS" toyline prior...it was, for a time, just the MOVIE...

Star Wars
Indiana Jones
The Matrix
Halloween
Robocop
Alien
Terminator
Predator
Evil Dead
John Carpenter's "Escape" Series

These are what are dubbed "Original"

People want the next "Robocop" or "Snake Plissken" character...a cool character that they can rally behind and be fans of and dress up as for Comic and Sci-Fi conventions.

Characters such as Riddick and Stories like "Firefly/Serenity" have tried, but while both may have reached some sense of cult status, neither has reached the peak of "phenomenon."

The only thing that comes close right now, to me, is on TV...and that's "HEROES"

But for film? Yeah I understand this complaint entirely...:o

CFE
 
I've been lurking around in the forums a lot, and I've seen people complain about there not being any original stories/screenplays that aren't remakes or adaptations or anything like that. Sometimes there are original movies that come out that are never noticed by the viewing public (sadly, I can't name any off the top of my head). In light of this, I feel that those of you aspiring filmmakers/writers (myself included) can bring something to the table that can turn people on their head (or however the expression is said), and (if possible) create a film studio where the director had full creative control instead of the studio taking over like they have over the last few years. Some-well actually-a lot of you will say "this is stupid" and just brush this thing off and this thread will be lost in the thousands of threads to come, but I just wanted to get that off my chest. Hopefully, a few of you will get my point.

- G.T.A.



There s one factor that you forget. Is it really that there s not enough original movie or is it simply that you re getting older? That s waht happen to me with video games . I was criticizing video game that there all the same but than I found out that it was me who had enough....I hope it doesnt happen with movies cause I m doomed....:dry:
 
There s one factor that you forget. Is it really that there s not enough original movie or is it simply that you re getting older? That s waht happen to me with video games . I was criticizing video game that there all the same but than I found out that it was me who had enough....I hope it doesnt happen with movies cause I m doomed....:dry:

I agree with this...

We're biased to the films we love...so much so that we're neglecting the original films of today.

For instance, "Indiana Jones" blinded us from "National Treasure" and "Sahara".

You could say they're not on Indy's level, but that right there would prove that you ARE biased towards Indy. And I'll admit it, I am biased towards the films I grew up with and the films I love.

But again I agree iwth Antoine, it plays a big factor in this discussion...

I think if we take the rose-colored glasses off, we could find original films lurking about.

Isn't that what we did with "Equilibrium" for example? Instead of thinking it to be a "Matrix" rip off we set that notion aside and much to our pleasant surprise, turns out "Equilibrium" kicks the collective asses of the "Matrix" films.

CFE
 
I agree with this...

We're biased to the films we love...so much so that we're neglecting the original films of today.

For instance, "Indiana Jones" blinded us from "National Treasure" and "Sahara".

You could say they're not on Indy's level, but that right there would prove that you ARE biased towards Indy. And I'll admit it, I am biased towards the films I grew up with and the films I love.

But again I agree iwth Antoine, it plays a big factor in this discussion...

I think if we take the rose-colored glasses off, we could find original films lurking about.

Isn't that what we did with "Equilibrium" for example? Instead of thinking it to be a "Matrix" rip off we set that notion aside and much to our pleasant surprise, turns out "Equilibrium" kicks the collective asses of the "Matrix" films.

CFE


Exactly if national treasure was done at the time of Indy we would have said that it s a classic.

An other thing is the number of movies we are watching. Back in the days going at the theater was something big but now I watch a movie once a week and at that rate don't be surprised if you get bored easily. ( And not to mention the one I watch on my computer :cwink: )
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"