Written by Liz Garcia

Graphic by Kadence Schaecher

Remakes, prequels, sequels, adaptations, reboots — the unoriginality in entertainment has felt particularly inescapable within the past few years. Even some of this year’s most anticipated releases were all adaptations or continuations of some sort: “Dune 2,” “Mean Girls,” the live action “Avatar: The Last Airbender” series and season 3 of “Bridgerton”. This seeming void of recycled content feels like a ravishing plague that studios are spreading without a cure.

Hollywood is no stranger to capitalizing on successful franchises, and audiences seem to be caught up in its whirlwind of greediness. The entertainment industry seems to be entering an era saturated with remakes.

In an interview with Cosmopolitan UK, Dr Matthew Jones, a lecturer of film studies at De Montfort University in Leicester, England, says the number of remakes is never specific, but are more concentrated in different points throughout time.

“The interesting thing about remakes isn’t really that they exist or are significant in number, but rather that there are more of them at certain moments in history. And we're certainly in one of those moments now," he said.

In perilous times of economic fragility filled with political tensions, studios rely on the monotonous machine of remakes to bring in revenue. Adverse to riskier business moves, a revival of a once-successful franchise calms studios, knowing they are attracting hesitant audiences to theaters. Studios might even depend on remakes like these to financially fuel other creative projects, but they can also be quick money grabs. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, studios halted their productions, and AMC, the largest movie theater chain in America, shut down around a thousand theaters. This experience undeniably altered the film production and distribution process. Since then, movies have had shorter stays in theaters, or they take a direct path to streaming hubs like Max or Amazon Prime. Even while a movie is still showing in theaters, it will become available on streaming shortly after its debut. This system further discourages audiences from taking a visit to the theater, which affects studio revenue. 

Now that the film industry has been focused on making its comeback, essential storytelling elements, from script writing to on-screen talent, are becoming compromised to prioritize immediate releases. The overuse of computer-generated imagery and flashy effects in films has unfortunately removed a human touch to many movies, all in an attempt to “wow” audiences. While practical effects look more natural and add a realistic touch to the film, they can sometimes be more costly. Skilled technicians have to be compensated for their intricate, time-consuming work on set; CGI can be easily produced with equipped computers and experienced animators. In other situations, excessive CGI can be more expensive. Nonetheless, with the accompanying pressure to constantly pump out content, CGI is an easy way out for studios to keep up with the demands of streaming and avoid properly paying workers. Actors also fear replacement due to studios embracing AI, a crucial concern raised during the SAG-AFTRA strike.

In 2023, Marvel was under fire for overworking and underpaying their visual effects artists, especially after some had come forward about the working conditions at the superhero studio. Artists working under the visual effects team for Marvel filed with the National Labor Relations Board for a unionization. According to a statement from the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, the union which these workers wished to be represented by, said visual effects workers have been historically unrepresented by IATSE. 

Big-name studios, like Marvel, continue to release their ever-popular movies while getting away with these unfair labor practices. Disney as a whole is a large contributor to the remake landfill, according to Senior Entertainment and Lifestyle Writer Daniella Scott at Cosmopolitan UK.

“They can simply look to pre-existing projects and revamp them for a modern-day audience; add a little CGI, a big-name lead and a zeitgeist-y soundtrack and it's likely to be a big hitter,” she said.

Disney’s powerful wave of nostalgia immediately washes over audiences when they see posters for the new “Mulan” or “The Little Mermaid,” reminding them of their innocent childhoods. Live-action remakes profit off this delicate feeling. Their brand recognition further encourages people to consume the media they once enjoyed rather than taking a chance on something up-and-coming. 

Though this may be comforting during tumultuous times, these retellings add little value to the Hollywood sphere. Remakes are being used as a tool to rake in copious revenue while studios avoid paying fair wages to the hardworking individuals across all departments on film sets. This is not a unique occurrence in Hollywood, though the market seems to be particularly saturated within the past few years. Studios also use CGI as a cop-out to avoid expensive effects as they manage the demands of the streaming era. 

Original storytelling does still exist in the midst of this overwhelming bombardment of remakes: 

“Anatomy of a Fall,” “Saltburn,” “Asteroid City,” and most recently, “Challengers,” are all triumphs. Individuals can also visit local, independent movie theaters, much like Springfield’s very own Moxie Cinema, to help ensure the future of filmmakers and storytellers. With 2023’s major box office successes like the “Barbenheimer” summer takeover and Taylor Swift’s “The Eras Tour,” and a promising future for 2024, the movies just may be coming back after all.