An interesting question has come up recently between myself and some on and off-line friends. By now most of you know that Oscar contender, The Departed, is a remake of the 2002 film, Infernal Affairs. Because The Departed is a remake, should it win best picture? I’ll just make a bold statement right now and say that in this particular case, the answer is no. In fact, I’m not sure it should even be considered for best picture. Examine…

     First of all, what does a best picture constitute? I would think that it should show an exemplary culmination of all aspects of film making. In other words, it should be outstanding in every part that encompasses the making of a film; such as directing, acting, screenplay writing, editing, and entertainment value to name a few. Different weights can be afforded to different attributes depending on the genre of the film as well. The Departed certainly qualifies as fantastic in all of these departments. But one other aspect of a film should be taken into account; and that is originality.

     Several remakes of films in past years have been nominated in the best picture category. The last one to win was 1955’s Marty; which was actually a spin-off from a TV show. Other winning films include:

1959 Ben-Hur
1968 Oliver!
1964 My Fair Lady
2003 Chicago

     I also found even more films that were nominated but did not get the win. Like 2001’s Moulin Rouge and 1978’s Heaven Can Wait to name a few.

     Now I am only discussing the best picture category. Many, MANY other films that are remakes have been nominated in several categories over the years. In fact, I can think about 5 or 6 from last year alone that were up for various awards. This would be different. A remake can be nominated for best visual effects or editing because that really has nothing to do with the original. But when you just take someone else’s movie and basically copy it, should it even be considered for the best film of the year award?

     I must say that The Departed is a fantastic movie. I loved the hell out of it and even have it at #9 on my top 10 favorite films of the year list. But this isn’t to say I think it is the best or should even be considered for the top honor. If it were, shouldn’t Wai Keung Lau, Siu Fai Mak and Felix Chong (directors and writers of Infernal Affairs) be recognized as equally as Martin Scorsese? I mean they were the ones who came up with the whole idea and storyline right? Scorsese et al. just took that and changed a few words and some actors and voila! The best picture of the year?

     Now, I might change my mind on this if a film is crap and it is remade to be something wonderful. Take Ishtar for example. Completely panned by critics and generally regarded as one of the worst films of all time. If Scorsese had taken that film and made it into something fantastic, I might be willing to cut him some slack. But he didn’t. He took an already great movie and made it into another great movie. I guess my sarcastic reaction would be, “big deal.”

     I’m interested to hear others’ thoughts on this. Some might argue, who cares? A good movie is a good movie right? Well yes, but why should Scorsese get all the accolades when he didn’t even write it or really have any hand in making it what it is. He just copied an already great movie: almost scene for scene I might add. This isn’t Gus Van Sant’s, 1998 version of a shot-for-shot remake of Psycho, but it’s not much different.

     Originality is a must when it comes to voting for the best film of the year. I may be in the minority, but I know for a fact I’m not alone on this. Now the only question is, are the Academy voters of the same mind; or more importantly, do they care? This could be Scorsese’s sympathy year. Let’s hope not.