Welcome to Curmudgeon Corner, a guest column where SarahGVincentViews.com invites a friend to share their thoughts about various topics. Today, our guest and friend is Bob Tremblay, who often goes to screenings and movies with me! Going to movies with Bob makes them even more fun!
Disclaimer: Any views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this column are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies or positions of SarahGVincentViews.com.
“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness.”
Can we give an Oscar to Oscar Wilde for that quote? As a film critic, I find far too many limitations in imitations. Instead, I prize originality for the simple reason that life is too short to see the same film again. And again. And again. Now, there are some folks who could care less about originality. They simply prize films that are entertaining.
In my perfect world, all films would be original and entertaining or at least thought-provoking. Of course, that’s never going to happen. Hollywood likes remakes, sequels, prequels and movies based on novels, comic books, TV shows and plays because they have a built-in audience. The latest trend in cinematic Xeroxing has studios taking animated films and turning them into live-action films. The results have been mixed, and that’s being kind.
Children who haven’t seen the animated version of “How to Train Your Dragon” (2010) will likely be entertained by the live-action version that hit theaters recently. I, however, was not. Some filmmakers try to at least add a dollop of originality in these remakes. Not here. It’s basically a shot-for-shot retread by the same writer/director who co-directed and co-wrote the 2010 film. The only major difference is it’s longer – two hours and five minutes versus one hour and 38 minutes. Talk about padding. The first film was based on a novel. Two sequels and five short films followed.
Want more copy-cat movies now in theaters? “Jurassic World: Rebirth” (2025) should be called “Jurassic World: Rehash.” Again, children who haven’t seen “Jurassic Park” (1993) will likely be entertained by this latest film in the “Jurassic” franchise. This one has spawned sequels, comic books, video games and amusement park rides.
“Rebirth” borrows nearly every element from the first film. Children in danger, a loathsome money-grubber and a last-second dinosaur rescue are just some examples. It is not surprising that the films are so similar since they share the same screenwriter. At least this film isn’t a shot-for-shot remake with more action taking place on the ocean. See if you can predict which characters are going to die. “Rebirth” even adds a cute dinosaur. Perfect for merchandising. Wonder how it will clear customs. And, surprise, surprise, the first film was based on a novel.
At least “F1: The Movie” (2025) isn’t based on a novel. What it is based on is “Top Gun: Maverick” (2022), which was a sequel of “Top Gun” (1986), which an article, Ehud Yonay’s “Top Guns” published in “California” magazine in May 1983, inspired. “F1” is basically “Top Gun” on a racetrack with Brad Pitt in the Tom Cruise role as the hunk du jour. Damson Idris gets to play the hot-shot character like Val Kilmer’s character in “Top Gun.” Ready for a coincidence? The director, screenwriter, cinematographer and composer of “Top Gun: Maverick” and “F1” are also the same with a few shared credits. The hell with familiarity breeding contempt. For producers, it can breed blockbusters.
Is “F1” entertaining? For many, the answer is an enthusiastic yes, especially if you understand or at least enjoy car racing. While I appreciate the immense amount of skill needed to be a successful car racer, not to mention the talent needed to create a successful car and hire a formidable pit crew, watching cars go around a track over and over again doesn’t rev my engine. I’m also betting there are some people who go to the race track not to watch the cars but to wait for the accidents. Crash junkies will certainly get their fix in “F1.” The film ODs on testosterone. But wait, it’s not all macho, macho men. To attract women moviegoers, the film adds a female character for a little romance. Fortunately, she isn’t just window dressing since she plays a significant role as a technical instructor.
If you just want to be entertained by a film, “F1” delivers. Its cast and crew have produced a quality product. Just don’t expect any surprises. A film with a reluctant hero, a man with a checkered past? Will he find redemption? Will the pope be Catholic?
I should point out that not all original films are worthwhile. And the same goes for films that focus on entertaining viewers. I should also add I have many guilty pleasures, enjoying films that aren’t remotely original.
That said, this critic would really like to see the end of remakes, sequels and prequels. I would also really like to see world peace. Seriously, how many of these films were better than the original? There are a few, but the misses far outnumber the hits. By the way, sequels, prequels and remakes are nothing new in Hollywood. It’s their proliferation today that’s so annoying. Unless you don’t mind seeing the same film over and over again.
