Unoriginal narrative structures, is this really a core issue?

Despite my undying (and probably unhealthy) admiration for the filmmaker James Cameron, a lot of the time I can agree with the negative opinions that people make about his work. His most recent films – Avatar (2009) and Titanic (1997) – have often been the victim of critical assault from all over the globe. When people talk of these films as being overly bloated, suffering from corny dialogue and possessing too many flat characters, I can’t really argue with them without coming across as a deluded fanboy (though these characteristics don’t diminish the enjoyment of these two films for me).

Yet one criticism about Avatar which has perplexed me somewhat is the constant attack on the films originality. “Avatar is just Dancing with Wolves in space!” is the most common response that people make after being asked why they loathe it so much.

Now I’m not saying that Avatar doesn’t borrow (or steal) elements from the Kevin Costner film Dances with Wolves (1990), in fact, I think it does. Dances with Wolves is a film about a Western soldier who’s exiled to a native land, where he befriends a group of native Americans and grows intolerable toward the military which he once worked for. Avatar is a film about a paraplegic marine who’s exiled to an alien planet, where he befriends a group of indigenous life forms and grows intolerable toward the colonising military that are bulldozing their planet.

Both films sound almost identical when you put them up against one another, but it does not make them the same story. They may both stem from the same narrative concept – the idea of an outsider befriending the natives and rising against the empire from which they once came – but both films are still worlds apart. Avatar simply takes this structure and adds a new twist to it (It’s Dances with Wolves, but set on an alien world with humans piloting alien bodies).

Taking narrative structures from pre-existing stories and adding a new twist to them is nothing new. One example of this takes place in many of the teen films from recent times. A large portion of these teen-movies were, in fact, the retellings of many famous plays and novels. 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) was a retelling of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew; Clueless (1994) is a reinvention of Jane Austen’s Emma; Cruel Intentions (1999) was an adaptation of the Pierre Choderlos de Laclos and Ernest Dowson novel Dangerous Liaisons; and She’s the Man (2006) is a remake of Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night*.

Teen films are not the only movies to borrow from pre-existing narratives. The Lion King (1994) retold the tale of Shakespeare’s Hamlet; Independence Day (1995) was an indirect remake of War of the Worlds; A.I. Artificial Intelligence (1999) borrowed much of its narrative from Pinocchio; and even Alien (1979) has always commonly been refferred to as ‘Jaws in Space’.

To go even further into the world of cloning stories for entertainment, think of all the direct remakes that overshadow the originals without too much criticism. The Thing (1982), The Fly (1986), Oceans 11 (2001), The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) and Scarface (1983) are often more talked about and remembered than their original counterparts are.

Some of the films that I’ve mentioned above are critically accepted, whereas some of them are not. Yet I’ve never heard of people attacking them for their lack of originality.

All works of art must have been inspired from things which came before them. This allows art to evolve and grow. Just because something takes the elements and characteristics from something that existed before it does not necessarily make it a bad thing.  Art inspires the imagination and motivates individuals into producing their own works, whether we are talking about music, films, books, paintings, or any other medium that exists out there.

So is borrowing the elements, characteristics and narratives of pre-existing works really what make some films bad? Maybe I’m being ignorant. Maybe if someone decided to borrow elements from something I’d created without asking, I too would see the problems in unoriginality.

Do the audiences of cinema really have an issue with features being unoriginal? Then again, looking at the endless armies of reboots, remakes, adaptations, sequels and prequels coming out in today’s cinema, and looking at the healthy $2.8 billion profit that Avatar made, maybe no one else really gives a hoot.

*teen-movie sources from: http://voices.yahoo.com/teen-movies-based-classic-novels-shakespeare-6313864.html?cat=2