That is absolutely incorrect.
And if you research this, you'd find out that many... MANY studios do this all the time. Just google competitive movies from different distribution and Studios and you'll see what I mean.
Here are a few examples, Deep Impact and Armageddon. Two movies that came out in the same year, dealing with the same thing. Two different studios at the helm. Clearly it's more than a mere coincidence that they utilize the same theme. How about The Descent and The Cave. This is even International vs. Hollywood competition. Shark Tale, Finding Nemo. Antz, a Bug's life. And the list goes on and on and on... Here's another one for example. Take the Movie Frequency and Compare it to South-Korean's (later released) Ditto. The main plot is near identical or carbon copy, A person comes across an old two-way-radio transmitter. After fixing it, that person attempts to contact someone through it and ends up communicating with someone from the past. Now.. that part is identical in both movies. However, in frequency, you get a Thriller/Suspense setting where a Son communicates with his (dead) father and uncovers a series of gruesome murders by an UN-captured criminal. It also deals with very detailed elements of the butterfly/ripple effect and show a certain approach to it.
However, the Korean one is more a Romance/Drama character driven based movie with the same vehicle to drive it (the Radio). In which again, a person communicates with a Person who was in-love with his father, yet ends up making the ultimate sacrifice in giving up that love so that the person (from the future) will exist. Then the prospect of the choices we make and how they affect consequences comes into play..
So clearly, two different movies with a very precise and detailed element that is far too detailed to be coincidental.. So, in that case, I'd be correct to presume that the Director was inspired by that element, yet chose to implement it differently. The storyline is different. The Characters are different. The core of the message and what is conveyed is different. So legally, it's a loophole and is not binding for any credits. Also, making a note in the movie crediting another would actually expose the director and studio for possible infringement or copyrights law-suits. It becomes self libel..
So I say again, Arrow has certain elements, in particularly (moreso, the only parts) that resemble Apocalypto, are the hunt and chase scenes. However, the message, the story and narrative is so far apart, that unless the writer himself makes it public, no legal action or suit would pass or win in such a case.
If the story was similar for instance, then you have something, otherwise... not really..
And for that matter, Apocalypto wasn't better than this movie. Just different.
Also, please do more research on criteria for Remake, Reboot/Re-imagined.
Ascribing arrow as a remake to Apocalypto is a real far cry and a stretch at-best.
reply
share
cooleon
13 years ago
I've seen Deep Impact/Armageddon/The Descent/The Cave/Finding Nemo/Antz/a Bug's life/Frequency/Ditto
probably not Shark Tale.
I don't think we are talking same level of similarities here.
Yes, Frequency/Ditto were very similar.
But Frequency/Ditto werere released in same year!!!
I doubt if anyone had any time to borrow any elements from each other.
And most importantly, others doing it, doesn’t make it right!!!
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
reply
share
Phanatic77
13 years ago
So the time frame being shorter makes it more forgivable?
Even with the Donggam/Frequency situation, you're talking South Korea and U.S. it's not like the directors or studio execs run in the same circle. So how do you explain this?
Also, just because one movie is released a certain year, it does not automatically means that the script/screenplay or treatment was written recently. It could've been shelved for years before production was commenced. And reasons could be as simple as Royalties and production rights (like Spiderman, which was in production hell as early as the 90's) and to as laborious as insufficient Technological advancements to produce (like Avatar, which was written as close as 10 years ago)..
Not everything is black and white. Not everything that comes out earlier means that it was written or conceived earlier.
That's to that point.
Secondly, other people committing crimes or acting in horrible and evil manner does not justify someone else repeating it. Popularity is a long-standing human fault and weakness, we all know this. However, I'm not arguing that it's okay to do so because others do it. I'm saying that there's nothing morally unethical about this as it is promoting healthy competition. Movies is not the only medium where this happens. Music is no different. And the same goes for cars.
Let's think about this for a second, why in the 80's, 90's and early 2000's GM offered both the Cameros and the Firebirds through Pontiac and Chevi when it's the same car with a different name and slight design modification.
What about Toyota Matrix built on a Corola Chasis that is equivalent to Pontiac's Vibe. Same car, slight different design, same engine... just different name and slightly different trims.. Oh.. let me guess, it ain't right?
It's called competition and offering consumers choices.
And finally, your core critique of Arrow is that it is a blatant rip-off of a better movie when clearly it is not; on the count of not ripping off anything, and neither being an inferior movie. For Arrow to have been a remake or a Re-imagined, the major concept and storyline should have remained the same, perhaps with slight setting and character alteration.. But the major components of the narrative would've had to be the same. It's no more a remake than Ditto being a remake of Frequency, which was released approximately a month prior..
You don't have to like the movie. Hell, you don't have to even give it good ratings. But if you're going to bash or flame it, at least have some validity behind your claims.
And just for the record, if people with your train of thought had been allowed to have their way, we wouldn't have been treated to magnificent material such as DC comics or Marvel, which both produced heavenly superhero material for years to come, for both printed and viewed material. I honestly can't imagine a world without knowing who or what Spiderman or X-Men is/are.. or without such an Iconic character as Superman.
reply
share
cooleon
10 years ago
I would hesitate to go as far as including other example.
It just complicates the argument.
I didn't read your whole post, but you seem to claim ''Deep Impact and Armageddon'' are in similar case.
Maybe some, but not as much as Choi-jong-byeong-gi Hwal and Apocalypto case.
Simply put;
Deep Impact was more about panic on earth, it was more oriented toward drama.
Armageddon was more about space travel and heroes, it was more pure pierce action.
I'll try to write another post for naysayers.
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
reply
share