I've Seen This Somewhere Before

We've all noticed it. One movie comes out, and it seems like minutes later another movie based around the same thing comes out. What is the deal?

It seems to go back a long way...I can remember the summer of 1985, when we got three "Science project" type movies at the same time. We had Weird Science, My Science Project and Back to the Future. Of course, of these three movies the one that people actually care about is Back to the Future. Weird Science was fun, and My Science Project sucked. We can trace this pattern back further than this, and definitely into the present.

Sometimes the clone movies are simply an attempt by one studio to cash in on another studio's hype (i.e. Wing Commander: The Movie coming out mere months before Star Wars: Episode I...and I know both are from 20th Century Fox, but is it any different if it's their own hype they're cashing in on?). Another good example is Roger Corman's Carnosaur coming out on video right around the time that Jurassic Park hit theaters. Corman's never been very good at subtlety.

Other times, it's simply a lack of originality in Hollywood. In 1997 we saw Dante's Peak (good, but not great) and Volcano (if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all). The studios in this case actually tried to get together at one point to make one volcano movie, but their "visions differed too greatly". You don't say...

Recently, this problem has gotten worse. This past year we've seen two "big rock is gonna destroy the earth" films, a couple of World War II epics (although, I don't think many people would find a lot of similarities between these movies), tons of "teen" flicks and about a dozen bad Scream clones.

Right now we seem to be under the attack of the "TV shows within a movie" era. First we had the (tremendously great even if some other people at this site don't agree) Jim Carrey, Ed Harris, Peter Weir-directed The Truman Show. This was followed by the very pleasant Pleasantville (which I enjoyed immensely and will be buying the DVD for tomorrow). This past weekend saw the introduction of the short-titled EdTV (I haven't seen it yet, so I have no comment nor opinion on this film, though when I have one you'll be the first to know).

The thing that makes this current crop of different movies which are the same are the great differences between them even though the basic theme is the same. In all three movies we have characters who are "trapped" in a television world and can't get out. Yet in all three movies we see different messages being delivered.

In The Truman Show, Peter Weir is showing us many different things. From one man's struggle to escape from the life which has been built for him (something we can all relate to at times, I'm sure) to a parable for our own society's unhealthy fascination with anything which happens to be on TV (whether it's good or not). And these are just the obvious themes. Forget about going into symbolism. (Oh, and as a side note in the great Truman Show debate of '99, let me add one comment regarding commentary about The Truman Show's ending --- I found it be easily summed up in one word "perfect").

In Pleasantville, writer/director Gary Ross is showing us two major things. One is that the way we look back on history is not necessarily the way it really was. We've all heard our parents, grandparents, elders go on about "the good ol' days", but in reality they weren't much different than the way things are now. Maybe a little slower paced, but the same things happened. People just didn't talk about it as much as they do now. The other thing we saw, of course, was a very obvious metaphor for any kind of social discrimination. Whether that is racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism. The "black and white" versus "color" argument can be used in any of these contexts. Pleasantville is not as subtle as The Truman Show, but at least the audience won't miss the point.

In EdTV, Ron Howard is attempting to show the world that celebrity is not all that it's cracked up to be. Unfortunately, Howard has always been an audience's director (not that there's anything wrong with that), and as such I expect that there won't be much subtlety in the film. The message will be out there for all to see, and in most Ron Howard flicks some character at some point will explicitly point out how things work to everybody. It happened in Splash, Cocoon and even Apollo 13. Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for Ron Howard as a director (I especially enjoyed Apollo 13), I just find that his movies don't hold a lot in the way of "surprises". You always gets what you pay for.

Of course, all this examination kind of misses the point of this whole diatribe. Why is it that Hollywood seems to be devoid of original ideas? I think the answer comes down to the basic inbreeding and money-grubbing that is Hollywood. If someone somewhere in Hollywood thinks someone has an idea that can make money, they all jump on the gravy train faster than Lionel Hutz at a ten car pileup. You get all these producers and writers and even directors (Michael Bay, anyone?) who can't seem to make enough money fast enough. They all decide that "disaster" movies are the next big thing, or "teen" movies, or whatever, and then we quickly see all the originality sucked out of these ideas. It usually takes an outsider to bring a fresh idea into the fold. We saw it with Kevin Smith and "Clerks", Kevin Williamson with "Scream" and even Todd Solondz with "Happiness". There are rare exceptions to this, but they seem to be only the most powerful people in Hollywood. Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, and a select few others.

So what's the solution? Kill all the producers? While that would probably work, it'd be messy, and then NATO would have to step in and start bombing, which would cause the San Andreas Fault to rupture, which would cause all of California to drop into the ocean, which would cause most of the world's movie making equipment to be destroyed, along with most of the movies, and since most of the people in Hollywood are like cockroaches it probably still wouldn't kill them...I could go on...

I suppose the real solution is for filmgoers to start voting with their dollars. Don't go see the big pieces of celluloid crap. We've already seen a propensity toward this with some recent would-be blockbusters which turned out to be just "busters". Films like Meet Joe Black, Lost In Space, of course Godzilla, and the end all be all of bombs (for the moment), the Postman. These films are proof that all the marketing hype in the world can't overcome bad word of mouth. You'll have a great opening weekend, and then "BOOM!" you're broke. I would argue that a great counter-strategy to give the studios an idea of where to go, is to go see some of the smaller independent films out there. That's not say that all the indie films are good (far from it), but at least they're experimental, and in a lot of cases, very moving. They're usually well-written, well-acted pieces of art. Sometimes the stories don't work, but if you read the reviews you can get a taste for what you might like. All that aside, though, I have to prove my hypocrisy and say the movie I'm most looking forward to this year is Star Wars: Episode One. On the other hand, Lucas has complete creative control, so it's like a really big independent film (that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!).

Anyhow, I suppose it's time to wrap up for the week.

Oh, and in a strange twist of fate, the first (and only...is anyone out there?) correct response to last week's quote was from our very own John Roberdeau. It was, of course, from Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey. This week I need someone else to get it, because John's last name is far too difficult to type.

And the quote is...

"That'll have them rolling in the aisles."

I was going to use "Whoa" as this week's quote, but then I figured I'd get a response for every movie Keanu Reeves has ever made. By the way, that's not a hint, just a comment (and a little dig of course), and I am planning on seeing The Matrix within the first six minutes it opens (but I do that with all "big" pictures).

Anyhow, until next week, www.whatisthematrix.com?