Hollywood lost any shred of credibility a long, long time ago. “The Biz” is all about selling as many tickets as possible; so they make films which they think will sell the most tickets. It has nothing to do with ‘art’ or talent. So we get lots and lots of super heroes, cops and lame ‘rom-coms.’ And they call that art.

The major studios basically steal all the good ideas from foreign films and re-package them and take out all the sex for the prudish American audience.

But the rest of the world still cares about making films which are thoughtful and intelligent – and so when Hollywood gets desperate for a movie which they think might have a shot at the Oscars, what do they do? They remake a foreign film, minus the nudity or “challenging” subtexts. Or artistic relevance.

Problem is: the remakes are never as good as the original. Because they take out all the subtlety and remove any narratives which are too complex, or which might offend the simpletons in America.

Hollywood remakes repeatedly allude with minimal subtlety that these shot-for-shot remakes exist solely for the depressingly large target audiences: those who hate reading, or who are incapable of coping with foreign language films’ subtitles or foreign people, for that matter…and with the attention span of an 8-year old. Very few American adults have any interest in seeing an actual foreign film with subtitles.

A cursory glance at the political discourse, mainstream entertainment options and paltry news coverage contributes generously to strengthening their claims. There’s a market for crass, low-brow, mind-numbingly stupid entertainment in America. A highly lucrative one.

Hollywood: the Reader’s Digest of cinema – and nearly as indigestible.

It must be such a comfort to Americans to know that Hollywood producers never underestimate the movie going public’s intelligence when it comes to taking an interesting idea and turning it into the anodyne pap required to keep them consuming mass quantities of overpriced cinema “refreshments.”

It’s like the Gold rush: at Oscar time everyone focuses on the occasional lucky strikes but the real money was made selling picks and shovels to the suckers. Not necessarily a bad thing; these adaptations do show that there is either a major dearth of talent in Hollywood, or a lack of creativity, or both. The movie going public’s malaise has to do with the end product to a great extent.

But as long as you put out something with lots of car chases, shootouts and explosions – the uncritical viewer will be happy. If that is the demographic making up the money part, expect more of the same.

Hollywood is a business and most films have to be justified under a business model. I’m not sure why people get so upset about it. The fact that a move (minus a quality story line; character development…) is based on a successful foreign-language film is probably a good business reason to make a new version…

I don’t see how it’s that much different from adapting a play or book. Maybe it will encourage people to see the original, too. In some cases that is certainly true…

Hollywood is typical of American corporate mentality: it is not good business to innovate or take too many risks. It needs sure fire winners. So just for a change from Batman 96, they choose a tried and tested foreign movie for the more intellectual of their audience. Sometimes it works, and then everyone congratulates themselves on what geniuses they are.

And if they don’t fornicate it up completely, it should bring in a profit. Meaning: no nipples! Throw in as much horrendous slow-motion violence as you want, mind – but no titillation!

Not in this god-fearing nation.