Hollywood remakes and sequels like ‘Jumanji’ and ‘Rings’ are lazy

In Opinion

In Hollywood’s current climate, it’s rare to find a movie that makes audiences fall in love its creative plot or can transport them into another world or make them re-evaluate their perspective on life. The wow factor that comes from fresh storylines has sadly faded.

It seems in the past decade or so, every movie that has been released is either based on something else or an extension of a never-ending series. Hollywood directors are running out of movie ideas and producing desperate and disappointing content.

In the case of remakes, directors use nostalgia as a ploy to bring in audiences who may associate the movie with childhood memories and experiences.

This can be seen in movies such as “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” and “Jurassic World,” where the plots were kept similar to the original, but the directors added a new twist and included everyone’s favorite actors. 

Sometimes they try to bring back movies that already had their due time in the limelight.

One example of a horrible movie sequel that was released in 2017 was the movie “Rings.” Not only did the first movie “The Ring” come out 16 years ago, but “The Ring Two” which came out in 2005 wasn’t even popular among fans or critics.

“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales,” the fifth movie in the series, didn’t fare any better when it was released in 2017 as it was the worst Pirates of the Caribbean movie, according to the scoring system on Rotten Tomatoes.

When directors aren’t ruining movie classics, they needlessly string out plotlines to multiple movies or lazily borrow from printed content, capitalizing on already popular book series and comics.

Who knows what Hollywood would have done if they didn’t have Marvel and DC at their disposal?

While preferring the book to the movie may be subjective, people have watched amazing books crumble on the big screen as actors fail to re-enact the story with the same emotional depth.

An example of this would be the film, “Maze Runner: The Death Cure”, which was a #1 New York Times bestselling book series by James Dashner, but failed to perform at even a mediocre level in the film arena.

Another example of failed books turned movies was the “Fifty Shades of Grey” trilogy. With an initial fan based already created, it seemed these movies would be a hit, but critic consensus was that “it was a less than satisfying experience on the big screen,” according to Rotten Tomatoes.

Moviegoers have become complacent in their viewing experiences and despite the lack of originality, consumers pour their money into these movies anyway, allowing Hollywood to produce more of these films.

Sure, some can argue that going to the movies is a fun hangout spot and bad movies can still make for great jokes afterwards, but who really wants to spend $14 to $20 on a movie that’s bad?

Sometimes sequels are successful and end up doing as well or better than the first. These rare exceptions include “Toy Story 2” and “The Dark Knight.” But instances like these are too few and far between to justify the amount of sequels being pushed out by the film industry.

This also isn’t to say that original movies are obsolete. Oscar-winning “Get Out,” which came to theaters last year, was a wildly creative movie directed by Jordan Peele, who isn’t readily known for directing.

Hollywood has the potential to release intriguing and interesting films, or else there wouldn’t be award shows that celebrate film as an art form, but when directors get caught up in making money-grabbers, they churn out bland, boring content that falls flat more often than it succeeds.

Mobile Sliding Menu