I took my son to see the movie "Cars" today. I was going to write a long post comparing the movie to "Doc Hollywood," but someone at Canada.com has already done so:
The makers of Doc Hollywood called. They want their movie back.
Cars rolls along like an animated, automotive version of that 1991 Michael J. Fox gem, from its basic plot points to its feel-good conclusion.
Stop us if you think you've heard this one before: A young hotshot on his way to Los Angeles causes a crash and gets stuck in a small town. Before he can leave, he must spend several days doing community service, only to find out that he likes the simple life there and that he's learned more about family and friendship than he'd ever imagined.
The main difference in Cars is that the characters are . . . well, they're cars, hence the title.
I was unable to find any attributation to the movie/book "Doc Hollywood" on the "Cars" website, or when I was watching the credits in the theatre. If Neil Shulman, MD didn't get a cut of the movie "Cars," he should sue.
1 comment:
Every artist borrows from other artists. The trick is either (1) to borrow from a story so famous that everyone knows you are doing it ("The Holy Grail" and the King Arthur stories, all of the Dracula movies); or (2) steal the story but distort it in such a novel way that no one really notices or cares ("The Lion King" and "Hamlet," "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" and the New Testament).
The problem comes when you steal a plot too superficially. That's when you come across as a fake.
Post a Comment