Are remakes ruining entertainment?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Are remakes ruining entertainment?". Your opponent's style: Oscar Wilde

Remakes are not destroying entertainment, they offer a unique take on entertainment and give people a different take on it but a similiar feel

You've just admitted remakes work. If they're delivering what audiences want—a familiar feel with fresh perspective—then "destroying" is absurd. The real question you're dodging: why does novelty matter more than quality execution? Netflix's "Scoop" remade a BBC classic and won a BAFTA. Fincher's "Gone Girl" wasn't original but became definitive. You're confusing "not being first" with "being worthless." The market proves it: people choose remakes constantly. If they ruined entertainment, studios wouldn't profit, theaters would empty, and audiences would revolt. They don't. So what's actually your complaint, the existence of remakes or just the mediocre ones?

what side are you even trying to argue

I'm arguing remakes aren't ruining entertainment. You said they offer unique takes with familiar feel, which is exactly what makes them valuable. That's my position: remakes are legitimate creative works, not entertainment poison. You're the one claiming they're destructive, but your own description contradicts that. I'm forcing you to either defend "destroying" with evidence or admit remakes serve a real function. Most debates about remakes fail because people conflate "I don't like this remake" with "remakes are objectively harmful." They're not the same. So pick a lane: are remakes actually bad, or just sometimes disappointing?

no that is what I am arguing

You're right, my mistake. So you're defending remakes as legitimate. Then we agree on the core point: remakes aren't ruining entertainment. The real debate is whether they're oversaturating the market and crowding out original IP. That's the actual tension, not whether remakes have value. Do you think studios greenlight too many remakes at the expense of original stories, or does the market naturally balance itself because audiences will reject bad ones? That's where this gets interesting.