Adaptations and Remakes

We live in an era of adaptations and remakes in video media. That is to say, a sizable percentage of film, television and web series are either based on an existing intellectual property, a remake of an existing intellectual property or both. 

Of the roughly fifty Hollywood films I am aware of with a 2024 release date, thirty one of them are adaptations or remakes. Several more of them are direct sequels to other media and two more are biographical pictures. This means we are looking at, as an estimate, only about one quarter to one fifth of cinema releases this year being original ideas.

Of course, this is before we start factoring in the endless torrent of content that is the internet. Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime have already released plenty of material based on existing properties at the time of writing this and will undoubtedly continue to release more as the year continues. 

Is this really that big of a difference to previous years though? Is it actually a bad thing that we’re seeing so little original content?

Well, the first question is actually reasonably easy to answer. It’s a little harder to find statistics for streaming services, but Box Office figures are always quite easy to come by. In the US, seven of the top ten highest grossing films for 2023 were adaptations or remakes and one of the remaining three was the fourth instalment in the John Wick franchise which is only a hair’s breadth from being in the same category. Here in Australia, the exact list of films was different but it was once again seven adaptations or remakes. Two of the remaining three movies were sequels. Oppenheimer just loves to be different… except it’s a biopic so it’s not exactly an original idea either, is it?

I can do the same thing for 2022 as well. In the US, eight of the top ten highest grossing films were adapted from existing properties in some way and the remaining two were direct sequels. In Australia, six movies were adaptations or remakes, two were sequels, one was a biopic and one was the re-release of Disney’s Moana.

However, if I go back to 2000, the numbers aren’t actually that different. Five of the top ten movies in the US were in some way adapted from existing intellectual properties (if we include Gladiator being based on a script from the late 1950s… although that was loosely based on reality anyway). One of the remaining five movies was a parody, so just barely doesn’t count. The situation wasn’t particularly different here.

The reality of the situation is that adaptations and remakes aren’t anything new. People have been adapting old intellectual property into movies since the earliest days of filmmaking. Yes, the practice is arguably more prevalent in more recent times than in the 1940s. Honestly, I would suggest it’s more prevalent now than in the early 2000s. But it’s definitely not new and a sizable part of why the practice is so noticeable now is just that considerably more media is being produced than previously. In the modern day, we have numerous streaming services, the box office and television all competing and all churning out more content than ever before. Naturally, this is going to magnify the amount of remakes and adaptations we get. It’s much easier to adapt existing material than it is to write something completely original and to cease producing a consistent stream of high-profit media is death to a service with so much competition out there. So yes, there are more remakes and adaptations. But there is more of everything. This is just a side-effect of that and it’s not going to change unless our consumerist cravings for media miraculously subside.

Which brings me to the next question, is this a bad thing? This is harder to answer. It’s not like there are any tangibly negative or positive effects I can really point to. We’re getting into territory that is a lot more subjective.

Netflix’s recent live action adaptation of One Piece has gone over extremely well. Although more divisive in nature, its adaptation of The Last Airbender also did quite well. Both are live action remakes of highly acclaimed animated media that many of us grew up on and still love and appreciate to this day. It’s not just media aimed at young people either. Amazon Prime’s Invincible is fantastically written and an engaging watch. It’s also adapted from a comic series. The Last of Us was some of the best TV I’ve seen in recent years and was based on a video game (which I admittedly also love).

But then there’s the absolute deluge of other superhero comic adaptations. The MCU always makes money, but its reviews haven’t been nearly as good since the Infinity Saga came to an end. How many of us groan, sigh and roll our eyes every time we see yet another live action remake of one of Disney’s animated classics? They do seem a bit soulless. But, by the same token, how many people have marvelled at the quality of the recent Dune movies?

People like to act like adaptations or remakes are inherently bad, but there is obviously a demand for them. Despite people’s complaints, a lot of adaptations and remakes end up being well-regarded or even beloved. I don’t think it’s as simple as something being bad just because it isn’t wholly original. 

Ignoring financial results - it’s a well-established fact that nostalgia and brand recognition will draw a crowd - as best I can tell, what it actually comes down to is balance. A good adaptation or remake needs to be true to important plot beats, themes and characters of the original material while still having enough of its own identity to stand on its own two feet. 

Which adaptations achieve this? Typically, I would say, they are the ones created by people who have a genuine love of the source material. The better the understanding of the original content creators have, the better they can stay truthful to the integral aspects of a story without making a soulless frame-by-frame carbon copy of the original. If you ask me, that’s why people are thrilled with One Piece and Dune but look at the 2017 The Mummy or Morbius with indifference at best. Involving the original creators is always a good idea on this front and I attribute a lot of the quality of Invincible and The Last of Us to that fact. But it’s not a necessity. I suppose it shouldn’t be a surprise that when people care about something, it turns out better than if it’s just their latest assignment.

Of course, that’s just my perspective as an audience member. While I highly doubt any of my work is headed for the screen any time soon, I’m also a writer. So I can also look at things a little bit from the other side.

I have to admit, remakes and especially adaptations might be a net positive for authors any way you look at it. Simply put, movies generate publicity and interest in the original intellectual property. If the movie or show is good, people want to read the book or the comic because of how much they liked the more condensed version. If the movie or show is bad, people might check out the written version to see what the story was supposed to be. Besides, either way, the original creator should make money off of optioning and royalties unless a corporation is being particularly scummy.

Where does this leave us? Well, the torrent of remakes probably isn’t going anywhere. But it’s always been there to some extent or another. As for the quality of these recreations, that’s actually pretty variable and really it comes down to the enthusiasm, effort and ability of the adaptors rather than the story being an adaptation to begin with. But, even those of us who are getting a bit tired of the endless deluge of old stories retold - myself included - can hopefully take solace in that it ultimately still brings attention to the original stories that we loved in the first place.