We get cinematic blockbuster after blockbuster each year of either superheroes trying to save the world, or some sort of random reboot/sequel that no one asked for, but Hollywood was desperate for some extra money, so they pumped it out anyway, but do you ever just sit back and think to yourself of how tiresome that is? With all of the writing talent out there in the world--many of which are stuck making those two types of movies--you're probably wondering why it is that there hasn't been an idea out there that's different and original. If you ever have thought about this, I have a pretty solid answer for you. Hollywood is deathly afraid of original ideas.

Remember how Star Wars started out in the 70s (I swear I'm not as old as I'm sounding right now) and how when it first came out, no one, not even George Lucas himself, thought the idea would stick, but it ended up doing exactly that and became one of the biggest franchises to date? This is the kind of original idea I'm talking about here, one that's so different from what anyone is used to that there'd be a 50-50 percent chance of it succeeding. I call ideas like these "risk takers." These are the movies that Hollywood today is way too afraid to produce because of the uncertainty of how much money they'll bring in. So, as a result, instead, they pump out movies that we've already seen, but with a slightly different title attached to it.

Remember back in the 80s, when slasher and horror films took up the big screen almost more than any other movie? Well that's because those types had a formula that the movie producers knew would work with audiences and could be used constantly without any sort of issue. The same thing applies here in the current time with superheroes and reboots. They're both movie types that are familiar with audiences and can cater to all demographics without issue. They're like the current plateau of the movie industry, which is fine as long as the movies aren't total garbage *coughs* Batman v. Superman *coughs*

But there comes a point where those tropes get old and the audience starts wanting to see something different, I daresay, something new and inventive. When that happens, watch out, because that's when Hollywood goes into a panic. They'll start spamming things like adaptations from books that really didn't need a movie series to begin with--Fifty Shades--and unnecessarily stretch them out into three long movies with hardly any content from the actual source material. They'd do all of this before giving their audience something new. Why would they go this far, you ask? Well, because of the 50-50 risk that I mentioned before, of course. Well, actually, no. That isn't very accurate anymore. It's actually more like 25-25-50, and I say that because there are three very important variables to take into account when an original idea is being considered. The first 25% is whether the idea is actually good, the second is whether the idea will be good enough to bring audiences in and keep them entertained, and then the big 50, and most important factor is whether or not it'll make enough money.

But there's another variable that can still ultimately break a new idea, and that's the mindset of the viewer. The movie could be an absolute masterpiece, but still deemed awful by a viewer. This has a lot to do with the kinds of movies they're used to seeing all the time--in other words, superheroes and reboots--and if these original movies aren't at all what they're accustomed to, they'll immediately lose interest in the movie and deem it as unwatchable. It's an unfortunate occurrence made even worse by how frequently it happens.

The sad truth of the matter is that no one seems to actually want a new movie. We're so used to the unending maelstrom of the same movies that anything outside of that is immediately seen as bad and then cast aside. As a movie consumer and writer, I make it a point to keep my movie range wide and open to any and all types in order to prevent this, and frankly, I think others ought to try that as well and remember what it is that makes movies so great in the first place.

Sure, everyone likes seeing bad guys get beat up by the good, but that's not all that there is to movies. Sometimes, movies can just be about the characters and how they react towards certain things and people, which, believe it or not, I actually kind of prefer as opposed to the typical good versus evil story. I want to be emotionally invested in what I'm watching, and to do that, I need a basic grasp on the characters and their motives, and then see how the plot revolves around those things. Too often, the reverse is what we viewers get, and that can be fine too if the plot is interesting enough to get people to look past their otherwise bland characters, but most times it isn't.

What I'm trying to say here is that what Hollywood often sees as bad movies aren't actually bad at all, just different. Now don't get me wrong, there are STILL a bunch of actual bad movies out there, but at the same time, there are still more that are completely underrated and simply misunderstood. So if you're like me and want a little more out of your movies than who's punching who and cheap nostalgia, try checking out some of the more obscure movies out there and see what you think. Like Fight Club, or American Beauty.

And if you're a writer also, don't be afraid to pitch your idea because you think they'll say it's bad. The movie industry, whether they want to admit it or not, is actually in dire need of "bad" ideas, and you never know, yours might just be the one Hollywood decides to take a risk on and wind up being next popular franchise like Star Wars.