cher@ihlpm.UUCP (Mike Cherepov) (03/08/85)
---
Yesterday I saw pieces of Buddy buddy on tv.
The story is a very close copy of a French comedy
made, I believe, in mid-70s.
I felt very disgusted because buddy's creators'
product is inferior in every respect: casting,
acting, humor,... everything.
That made me wonder about copyright regulations.
If the French crew, indeed, was the first to use the story -
does the author of the script get paid?
Also on the sad note: it is a pity that instead of
release of an excellent foreign film the American
public received a second-hand remake. Thus another
question is about lack of wide foreign releases.
What makes things like making Buddy profitable? Is it just public's
need to see a momentous familiar name (like Lemmon)?
Hard to believe.
Mike Cherepovreiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/12/85)
In article <168@ihlpm.UUCP> cher@ihlpm.UUCP (Mike Cherepov) writes: >--- > >Yesterday I saw pieces of Buddy buddy on tv. >The story is a very close copy of a French comedy >made, I believe, in mid-70s. >That made me wonder about copyright regulations. >If the French crew, indeed, was the first to use the story - >does the author of the script get paid? > Yes, the original screenwriter did receive some form of payment for use of his story. Probably also the producers of the original, probably not anyone else associated with it. I don't know the details, so I'm not sure if the payment was a lump sum, royalties, or whatever. >Also on the sad note: it is a pity that instead of >release of an excellent foreign film the American >public received a second-hand remake. Thus another >question is about lack of wide foreign releases. >What makes things like making Buddy profitable? Is it just public's >need to see a momentous familiar name (like Lemmon)? As I recollect it, "Buddy Buddy" flopped pretty big. If it made money, it certainly didn't make very much, despite the presence of Lemmon and Walter Matthau, and despite Billy Wilder as director. Remakes of foreign films have been around for a long time, at least since sound came in. (Actually, before, but then they were viewed as little different from remakes of domestic movies.) Sometimes they work out fairly well, like "The Magnificent Seven", which was a decent remake of "The Seven Samurai". Sometimes they aren't very good, but make money anyway, like "The Woman in Red" and "The Toy". Sometimes they flop, like "Buddy Buddy" and "Blame it on Rio". Ripping off French films is particularly popular nowadays, since the French film industry makes the same sort of entertainment films (usually on a smaller scale) as Hollywood. Japanese samurai movies used to be made into the occasional Western (such as "The Outrage", would you believe a Western version of "Rashomon" with Paul Newman and Edward G. Robinson?), and Italian comedies get cannibalized once in a while. Other nations' films are ripped off much less frequently. Since the amount of money a film in a language other than English can make in the US is strictly limited, Hollywood producers prefer to remake good stories from foreign films to releasing the originals. If your remake works out OK, you can turn a handy profit of $20-30 million, or even more. I don't remember the exact figures, but I don't think that "La Cage Aux Folles", the biggest grossing foreign language picture (in America) ever even *grossed* that much. Pure greed, as usual, is the motive. -- Peter Reiher reiher@ucla-cs.arpa {...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher
briand@tekig1.UUCP (Brian Diehm) (03/18/85)
> That made me wonder about copyright regulations. > If the French crew, indeed, was the first to use the story - > does the author of the script get paid? > > Also on the sad note: it is a pity that instead of > release of an excellent foreign film the American > public received a second-hand remake. Thus another > question is about lack of wide foreign releases. > What makes things like making Buddy profitable? Is it just public's > need to see a momentous familiar name (like Lemmon)? > Hard to believe. A few years ago there was a French release, "The Toy", starring the guy who was "The Tall Blond Man." It was funny, sad, sensitive, and had redeeming social value. It was a pretty good film. So what did Hollywood do? THEY made an exact copy starring (of all classical miscasts) Jackie Gleason!!! The remake was long on maudlin sentimentality and short on everything that makes a film warm, lovable, and meaningful. It was melodramatic treacle. And what did they name the plagaristic travesty? "The Toy!" Actually, Hollywood is quite insensitive and immoral in this regard. The "author" of "Blame It On Rio", Larry Gelbart (who has done original plays in the past) quite candidly admitted in an interview that the "inspiration" for this piece of tripe came from watching a French film with a friend. At the end he and his friend looked at each other and said "Let's do it!", as if it hadn't just been "done" before their very eyes! It didn't even sound as if Gelbart found anything to be ashamed of, he was just explaining his source of "artistic inspiration" for "his" movie. The sheer chutzpah of this attitude is so appalling that I hesitate to give money to any American production. This sort of attitude has in history led to racism, slavery, Detroit gas guzzlers, and the White Man's burden. The Japanese imitate to learn and improve, these guys imitate because they can't honestly understand that the WOGs are people too! And their patronizing makes the product worse, because they can't see any room for improvement on their miserable product. And besides, I'll always wonder, was the French version of "Blame It On Rio" perhaps a reasonably decent film? Naaah. . . -Brian Diehm Tektronix, Inc. (who cares about movies only if they include Tek 'scopes) slavery
reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/23/85)
>Actually, Hollywood is quite insensitive and immoral in this regard. >... >The sheer chutzpah of this attitude is so appalling that I hesitate to give >money to any American production. This sort of attitude has in history led to >racism, slavery, Detroit gas guzzlers, and the White Man's burden. The >Japanese imitate to learn and improve, these guys imitate because they can't >honestly understand that the WOGs are people too! And their patronizing makes >the product worse, because they can't see any room for improvement on their >miserable product. It's really not fair to single out Hollywood for this behavior. Just about any nation which makes movies for profit has a certain amount of this. Italy and Japan are especially notorious. (The Japanese do not always learn and improve, sometimes they just cop a quick yen or two.) Hollywood almost always "changes" its ripoffs, but the changes are usually for the worse. It really isn't at all like racism, slavery, or the White Man's burden. It's a little like gas guzzlers. It's a quick way to make money without having original ideas. We're talking greed here, not arrogance, and America certainly hasn't cornered the market on avarice. >And besides, I'll always wonder, was the French version of "Blame It On Rio" >perhaps a reasonably decent film? Naaah. . . I haven't seen the French version ("One Wild Moment"), as French comedies are generally rather low on my "must see" list, but I've heard it's a rather charming lightweight movie, and a definite improvement over the American version. -- Peter Reiher reiher@ucla-cs.arpa {...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher