So hello everyone and welcome to another week!

I thought I’d try something a little different this week and try to mix things up a bit. I do encourage feedback so leave them in the comments if you will, please.

I’ve wanted to write this for a while and I thought this was a perfect opportunity. I thought about doing another “Hidden Gems” and write about the great Steve Martin and Eddie Murphy film, “Bowfinger” from 1999. I would like to call this the year that originality in films died. The 21st century has marked the decade where sequel, after sequel, after remake, after remake, after book adaptation, after comic book adaptation, after video game adaptation has been made. Although some came out great (see Spider-Man 2), and some not so great (see Spider-Man 3). I bring up Bowfinger because it is a film where low budget filmmakers do everything they can to make a movie, yet get squashed down by the big guys. Movie studios do not want to bank on an original screenplay these days. Everything has to be a sequel or a remake of something else. Hollywood these days likes to copy everyone else, especially with this new 3D craze. So why is that? Let’s explore!

The Sequel

A sequel EVERYONE wants

Your original film broke box office records, got a few Oscar/Emmy nominations, and your unknown actors are now A-list, what’s next? What guarantees money? The exact same thing! Sequels are nothing new in the industry. Hell, Freddy Kruger got to dip in the pool various times, although too many times if you ask me. It isn’t until lately that they have been appearing everywhere. Audiences are enamored with seeing their favorite characters over and over again in another whacky and crazy adventure. Some turn out to be absolutely amazing, much like The Dark Knight. A film that explored further what Batman Begins had established and with great writing managed to create a few new characters that won’t soon be forgotten in cinema. Then there are the sequels that are just for the family cash cow. Transformers 2 was a film that added nothing to the overall story arc of the Transformers universe. It was a film just to make money and its bad writing and directing prove that little to no thought process was put into this film. Yet, audiences flocked to see it (guilty, though I had too high hopes for it). Let’s look at some of the numbers of the top movie sequels of 2009.

Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen $402,111,870

Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel $219,553,378

X-Men Origins: Wolverine $179,883,157 (although not direct sequel, still a continuation)

These are just a few, but you can see that audiences LOVE sequels whether they’re good or not. Mostly not. Though I will say that one of best movies of 2009 was an original screenplay and that was “The Hangover.” Even then, it is getting the sequel treatment, and not only that, it’s going to be in 3D. Help us! Not only that, another hugely successful movie of 2009 was an original screenplay, Paranormal Activity. Let us continue to push these original movies because there is gold in the script. Author’s Note: Don’t you dare tell me romantic comedies are original because they’re all the same, except for (500) Days of Summer, my personal favorite movie of 2009.

3D

We sure do like fads!

A new phenomenon that appeared on many people’s radar last year and hit the mainstream with Avatar. After the success with Avatar everyone jumped on the 3D bandwagon. Too many to name so check out the list here. I will be honest that I do love the concept of 3D, if it is done right and SHOT IN 3D. 3D cameras are expensive, so what are studios doing now, converting their films into 3D in post production with fancy computers. It is really important for audiences to tell the difference between a movie being shot in 3D and one converted into 3D. Avatar was shot in 3D and looked spectacular. Clash of the Titans was converted into 3D and looked awful. In my opinion, one of Alice in Wonderland’s many flaws resulted in the failed attempt to convert the film into 3D format. Everything looked like cardboard cutouts without any real depth. Then there are potentially good films that do not need the 3D treatment. “Step-Up 3D” does not need to be in 3D, Shrek does not need to be in 3D, Piranha 3D does not need to be in 3D. THE HANGOVER 2 DOES NOT NEED TO BE IN 3D! Like I said, I am a fan of 3D if it is done right, so I will reserve my judgment. Either way, you as the audience need to realize when a movie is not filmed in 3D and act accordingly. It could very well save you a couple of dollars.

In the end, what I’m trying to tell you is to be smart about what you choose to go to the movies for. Of course there is a lot more to talk about that I haven’t covered, including adaptations from books and such, so I will leave that for another day. I will leave you with a few things to ask yourself: Is this a movie sequel, strictly for financial gain, or is this a well thought out film that is well deserving of a sequel. Also, is 3D really here to stay? Do I really need stinky glasses that some pimple faced kid just wore before me? Do I really need to spend 7 extra dollars for the IMAX 3D EXPERIENCE? Ask yourself these questions before heading out the movies this weekend!

Don’t forget the popcorn

• Fin