Old Faithfuls Vs. New and Original

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I read a great article about two weeks ago about how nostalgia is threatening to drown the sci-fi genre. Sure, we all want to drool over another AvP (a franchise that is 20+ years old) and we'll all watch the Star Wars TV series (another old, old franchise), but where are the new and fresh ideas? Sunshine was a fantastic sci-fi movie which was refreshingly sequel and prequel free. I would dare to say that Cloverfield is a new take on the monster movie genre (which is probably included in sci-fi), but when are studios going to stop relying on old favorites like Star Wars and Star Trek and really let some filmmakers break new ground like Kubrick did when he made 2001 - a film that changed the sci-fi genre forever?

I'm not saying I'm against this Star Trek movie, as I'm sure it could be very well done and greatly entertaining. But I'm with Droo in wondering when we're going to get some original ideas for movies instead of mining from the vaults of sci-fi fandom and lore?

Incidentally, this is probably where this thread jumps the shark and the discussion needs to be moved to a thread of its own. Which, I shall do. :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

Its tough how do you do something original? That Fantasy film genere is kind of having a similar problem but in that case it is nothing besides Potter, LOTR and Narnia are breaking out. And everything else they try seems like a retread on one of the others. Originality is a tough thing since it is really rare. Star Wars wasn't very original. Now what needs to happen is somebody to come along and take past ideas and make them into something fresh.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20169296,00.html
This is the article I read on the subject, btw

[Peter McCoy]

...a multidisc collection of five different versions of the 1982 film Blade Runner, which is itself based on a 40-year-old Philip K. Dick novel. Personally, I'm holding out for a SuperPlatinum Deluxe Psychotic Edition, which will arrive in a crate containing 47 discs and Ridley Scott himself, who will hang out with you and then rewire your home sound system.

I fell apart when I read this.

A very good article that is dead right!

The one well-established sci-fi franchise I would kill to see another movie from is the Alien saga. Forget AvP - I would just die of happiness if an Alien 5 became a reality. And who better to do it than the guy who started it all - Ridley Scott. He always said it was the creatures ability to change that interested him the most. The egg, then the facehugger, then the chestburster, then the drone. There were warriors and a queen in Aliens. I think Scott and Giger should bang their heads together and see what comes out, then terrify us with it on a cinema screen!

But beyond that, I want something new. Undoubtedly, science fiction is my favourite genre and I do find it upsetting that the genre seems to be in a state of stagnation - filmwise that is. There's plenty of sci-fi in novels and video games to go around. But as I mentioned in the other thread, there has been one really great sci-fi since Gattaca for me - Sunshine. It's those types of films that the genre really needs. One's that are perhaps a little closer to home than the likes of Star Wars and Star Trek. Futures that are seemingly just around the corner and almost feasible.

We've got James Cameron's Avatar to look forward to next year. Finally he's giving us a new science fiction film - and Sigourney Weaver's in it too! :) As far as I know it's an original story written by Cameron, so hopefully it'll feel fresh with new ideas.

Oooh, just thinking about science fiction has given me a potentially good idea for a story. More on that at a later time, I need to make notes!

[Jeseth Cloak]

It's interesting that you brought this up... I was thinking something similar the other day. I don't think that this is a problem particular to sci-fi or fantasy films though; it's an issue with most movie genres. You only really have a handful of films each year that are good enough to be remembered and loved, and the others mostly fade from memory after crashing and burning at the box office.

[Mu Satach]

It costs money to be original and often times you don't get your investment back. Banker's don't like betting money on risky business.

[Yog]

Sunshine was a fantastic sci-fi movie which was refreshingly sequel and prequel free.

It was also a movie that made an amazing $3,6M on the box office..

Like it or not, the sci fi genre is a niche genre. The investors and studios are not willing to risk supporting something entirely new when so few buy the tickets. To ilustrate this better, movies like The Nutty Professor 1&2 (128M/123M) makes twice as much money as "The Fifth Element" (63M), and that makes more than twice as much money as Event Horizon (26M) and Serenity (25M), and that again makes more money than Gattaca (12M). The genre is stale in creativity because no one is willing to spend the money to see them.

[Peter McCoy]

It's such a shame that the figures you quoted are inversely proportional to the quality of film-making in those movies (of course that's opinion).

Unfortunately, you're right on target there Yog. Why risk money on something that's uncertain when studios can play it safe with tried and tested avenues of film? And when something new usually does turn up on the cinema, it's not new at all, but derived from another sci-fi medium such as videogames or comic books. Look at the Marvel films - a much cheaper-produced medium that has built a fanbase prior to the big companies stepping in to milk the much-loved comic franchises. And then, even they suffer the same fate. Look what happened to the X-Men trilogy as a result of the studio getting greedy and impatient - The Last Stand was a much poorer film by losing Brian Singer's direction. I think Droo told me Singer was happy to finish the trilogy after he'd done Superman Returns, but Fox wanted to get cracking and so gave the helm to someone else. They wanted the money now, not then.

Ultimately it comes down to money.

Of course, getting a certain actor to star in such films can help them get made. If a major star shows interest in a script, it has a much better chance of being turned into a film since the studio's have a good bet that the film will open well as a result of the actor's name being attached - but there's yet more money involved there so it's a double-edged sword.

Ah, if only this were the United Federation of Planets - there'd be no money and we could all publish our own holo-novels on a monthly basis!

But when the big-wigs aren't afraid to pony up the dough, what we get are truly some of the most creative movies ever.

[Dasquian Belargic]

There is so much source material for sci-fi movies, I suppose it's hard to know where to begin picking and choosing what would convert well from the page to the big screen. I'd love to see something like 'I Hae No Mouth and I Must Scream (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_No_Mouth%2C_and_I_Must_Scream)' made into a movie. I suppose most stories of that ilk, though, are simply too bleak for Hollywood to latch onto. Endings would have to be rewritten and the impact of the source material would be lost.

[Jeseth Cloak]

They should make a movie based on Hyperion by Dan Simmons.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Hyperion is probably too complex to translate into a Hollywood-viable movie, what with the multiple timelines and all.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I always thought they should do something with the Foundation series by Asimov.

Of course, these are not 'original' ideas, they're just fantastic books that haven't been made into films yet. :p

I do understand that the tried and true make money and the new and innovative don't, usually. There must be some sort of happy medium though - where a studio can make a film that is different and original for less money, so when less people see it the film can still pencil out for the studio. Y'know?

Stupid studio heads. :shakefist

Something like a Hyperion or Foundation trilogy or series would be tremendously big budget, however, if they wanted to 'get it right.'

[Mu Satach]

About the best one could hope for is that an Indie production company like <a href="http://www.walden.com">Walden</a> falls in love with the source material enough to pull off something like that.