This is definitely an area I find pretty interesting. Originality seems like this thing many people abandoned a long time ago when some primary school professor told them 'nothing new is ever created'. There's this notion that no idea is new, but I think that idea is misconstrued. There are actually tons of new ideas out there that we've simply never come upon or have yet to find the means to realize. A story set in a world so interlaced with technology that one dissident could make great change with a small device is a largely fresh idea when looked at the sum of its parts. The narrative structure may rely on tried-and-true tropes along the way, absolutely, but that perspective used to build the experience is still very much new. Games like Last of Us, Watch Dogs, Half Life 2, Mirror's Edge, and Fallout, are not games built on entirely new ideas. What makes them original content are how the elements relate to tell their stories. Originality is how we use our predecssors' tools and our creativity to make something worth experiencing. Even Mirror's Edge is actually very similar to Watch Dogs and Half Life 2 in that they star revolutionaries fighting an oppressive system, but focusing on a specific perspective that most do not have can make an experience truthfully original. TLDR: Originality is not necessarily creating absolutely new everything. It is absolutely possible to create something 'new'.
Moving forward, I hear you Dervish. I deeply enjoyed Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy for their direct plan as to how they wanted to explore each character. The stories seemed self-contained, unaware to the public in that the series did not exist in response to trendy consumerism. We have to realize that America places more value in commodifying a thing than it does on sharing it. The point is to make it a product and to bring in a profit. When creators seek to provide stories that defy simply sating the common tide, such as Tarantino's films often do, we start to see creations built because someone thought the idea was worth sharing. Sure, money is a factor, but we all can tell a movie that's been made solely for-profit vs. one crafted as a labour of love. I personally think Marvel is an interesting situation. I enjoyed the first rotation of Marvel films, though I found Captain America somewhat campy. Continuing the stories makes sense, but it's getting hard to discern if these films are being made to explore new perspectives of each character for a grander tale, or if they're just trying to create an endless series. I find this especially disturbing when we've also just had Nolan do a take meant only for three films, which tried to make direct ties to social concerns and clearly had cultural relevance. Superhero movies have the same potential as their comic forms. They can absolutely tell stories that grip us deeply, making us consider new perspectives on our world. I think it must be harder to keep that as your mission in film though, where a successful hero flicks require hundreds of millions of dollars as opposed to a graphic novel.
We are in a really interesting time for creativity. Most of us have cameras and phones more than capable of producing imagery of a quality most can endure (if not enjoy). Everyone can produce a story, whether it be a brief slice-of-life caught at home, or some play-acting with friends. Netflix and Hulu originals are a serious thing that might still have a significant budget, but are actually pretty affordable in comparison to mainstream television. My point is that we have a stake in the content of these stories. We have the means to create media critiquing what's being produced as well as creating what we desire. Fan-films already make great impact on showing the support for ideas. I look forward to seeing us change our idea of media as this big-budget-required-to-be-good entity. I think that would actually change this whole idea of originality in a way we've never really seen before.