Masuk Free Press

Living in a time when information and creation tools are more accessible than ever, you might think that the arts would be brimming with new ideas and storylines. It is quite upsetting to find how increasingly rare originality has become in the media. Both the industries of Hollywood and other forms of entertainment seem to have latched onto reboots and sequels, striving so hard to strike a chord of nostalgia rather than offering fresh stories. This reality brings forth the concern that the movie industry would sooner reconstruct characters and concepts than tread new ground.

Take Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, for example. Instead of writing a new script or creating new characters, filmmakers decided to rely on what was known by using the nostalgia effect from the original film. Critics feel this attempt at nostalgia has fallen rather flat, and is somewhat disappointing, lacking the charm that made the original a classic. 

“I mean it was a good movie, but it will never be the original,” said senior Niti Shah. “I think the writers kind of shot themselves in the foot there because no matter how good they made it, it would never be what the first one was.” The sequel comes off as a pale shadow of its predecessor, milking on nothing but the attachment of an audience to the past.

You might wonder why this phenomenon persists if the audiences don’t like it. One essential factor is the cultural climate that limits the willingness of producers to take creative risks. In a social-media-driven media environment where one negative review can qualify as a backlash, creators opt out and play it safe with established formulas, numbing creativity and fostering only an environment for sequels at the cost of originality. However, vocal online discourse helps promote honest debate regarding media; It pushes back against the culture of absolute homogeneity in film.

Last year, the Barbie movie attempted to teach major themes regarding women’s identity and feminism. Many felt its attempt was no more nuanced than one might offer to a three-year-old, as if the filmmakers acted on the belief that their audience needed to be spoken to like children when driving home messages of female oppression. 

“I enjoyed the Barbie movie, but I did think that the whole monologue about women was kind of something I had heard before. Like it was nothing new,” said senior Aubrey Zvovushe-Ramos. If the goal is to challenge outdated ideologies, why not direct the message to those perpetuating these ideas rather than infantilizing the overwhelmingly female audience?

This is also why we have seen a rise in biopics and dramatizations about prominent figures. Rather than creating new characters and stories, Hollywood cares more about finding ways to cash in on teenage girl’s love for hot actors playing serial killers, than actually telling a story. 

Even more depressing is the fact that, regarding pop culture, if you look closer at the highest-grossing films and shows, you will notice easily that most of them were built on the basis of previously established franchises. Whether it is superhero movies, animated films taken to live-action versions or the latest reimagining of a classic, the trend is undeniable. In 2023, the highest-grossing films were Barbie, The Super Mario Bros. Movie and Oppenheimer, all of which are based on franchises or stories that already exist. I mean, sure, it does make sense. If it’s more financially secure for a company to develop the franchise of already established brands, because box-office returns are the measure of a project’s success, then studios have every incentive to cash in on established stories rather than to take a risk on new ideas. While it is understandable the studios want to minimize financial risk, the result is homogenized media options that value profit over artistic expression.

It would be an understatement to say that social media influences public discourse. The current climate seems to prevent any serious debate about art or entertainment, reducing a complex narrative into soundbites that are easily digested or discarded. In this situation, criticism against widely popular media becomes highly oppositional. It creates an environment in which creators are afraid to challenge the status quo and/or deal with challenging topics, preventing any bold storytelling, and reinforcing all the more strongly the reliance on patterns of storytelling with which audiences are already familiar.

“Last year I would never even consider criticizing the Barbie movie. Like, I think I would be crucified for that,” said Zvovushe-Ramos. “And honestly I would probably criticize other people for saying bad things about it, too. That’s just how the world was at the time.”

This phenomenon has more effects than on just film or show. The dominance of recycled content in popular culture sends a disturbing message concerning the value of originality. That would mean that audiences only want more of the same, and make it extremely difficult for new voices, innovative voices that are the lifeblood behind the evolution of storytelling, to have something to say. Whenever new creators try to bring something original, they always have to jump over numerous obstacles, such as lack of funds and support, which makes it impossible for them to break into an industry far too dependent upon established properties.

“I’ve been watching more short films on YouTube lately,” said senior Alexa Gill. “I find that they are more diverse in topics than a lot of the more mainstream media.”

Many critics believe this vicious circle of nostalgia and recycling threatens to result in a kind of cultural stagnation. When original compositions lose to the popular franchise, we miss the chance for unique voices and points of view to emerge. It is exploration and experimentation that keep the art of storytelling alive; being confined to the same storylines means that we stop an opportunity to contemplate complex themes and subjects relevant to today’s viewers.

Equally disturbing is how this trend paternalizes audiences. Even though Barbie-esque movies are made with noble intent, the message more often than not comes off as simplistic and patronizing. So long as artists continue to believe that audiences cannot understand heavy social topics without being hit over the head, they will never engage those for whom depth of character and theme is possible. Rather, good storytelling should invite viewers into a conversation that might leave them engaged in deep, critical thought about the themes before them rather than merely passively accepting a message.

In an industry where old ideas are being remade with increasing frequency, it is about time voices were raised to advocate for more original storytelling. We believe in getting a story that provokes us, presses us to think, and invites critical engagement. There should be a need to realize the importance of new insights, and the need for sailing into new stories that reflect our shifting world.

The audience, in return, should demonstrate an equal demand for a shift away from such bland, nostalgia-driven content. It is time for consumers to seek out something different; for independent films and artists that are fearless and attempt to say something new, over the reduction of ideas to express the same themes over and over again. Similarly, industry folk should be encouraged to support such projects emphasizing storytelling compared with projects that cash in on nothing more than name recognition.

The nostalgia-driven content cycle is more than a fad — it is representative of a serious failing of the media landscape. We should be calling on the industry to break the cycles of known narratives and attempt true originality. If we continue to allow established stories to dominate as a safety net for our cultural output, then we handicap our shared imagination and limit the scope of storytelling. Only by embracing new voices and ideas can we have a richly varied cultural environment that reflects our world’s complexities. The future of storytelling depends on it.