If one takes a quick glance at the remaining summer “blockbusters” that the 2006 season has… If one takes a quick glance at the remaining summer “blockbusters” that the 2006 season has to offer, “originality” is not a word that comes to mind. Most of the films set to open in the late June/July timeframe are remakes, prequels, sequels or television brought to film.

It’s tough to decide whether or not one can look down upon the lack of new ideas from filmmakers, since this topic seems to come into question every summer. Somehow, miraculously, the box office gets to laugh in our faces every time when all of the projected hits end up making money.

It’s the continued mystery that has long perplexed film critics and filmgoers alike: People complain that Hollywood lacks originality, yet when the “un-original” titles come out, everyone flocks to the theater.

Looking at the upcoming releases for the next few weeks, “Superman Returns” is bound to get the most buzz and box office success. Whether or not it’s actually a good movie won’t really matter — we’ve seen that happen before, most recently in “The Da Vinci Code.” General disappointment was the overarching response in the critical circle at least, but the film still stands as a monster success.

Yet “Superman” shares something very much in common with “The Da Vinci Code,” and that is familiarity. You’d be hard pressed to find someone who isn’t familiar with the comic book, hasn’t seen the original or doesn’t consider Superman to be at the peak of superhero status. It’s a sure hit, but it’s still disappointing to know that the most noteworthy summer blockbuster is nothing fresh and nothing new.

Therein lies the problem: If you know that remakes, sequels and prequels are bound to make money, where is the motivation to make something creative? Where is the motivation to try something new? Sometimes such films are essential — like the long-anticipated, necessary “Star Wars: Episode III” — but “Miami Vice?” Something tells me that no one was losing sleep over the absence of a film adaptation.

I remember years back when low-budget “Memento” swept across the nation, partly in theaters, but mainly on DVD. It was respectfully received, but most notably, people observed its original quality and smart script. It wasn’t perfect, but it carried the excitement of being something different.

“Napoleon Dynamite” reached similar status: Even if you couldn’t stand something so off-kilter on the first viewing, it eventually becomes hilarious. Few characters in comedic history will ever be remembered more than Napoleon, and it’s something you have to appreciate.

This summer, I’ll be among the many moviegoers dishing out cash to see “Pirates of the Caribbean 2,” or “Clerks 2,” or “Miami Vice” — but we all have limits, and I refuse to see the third installment of “The Fast and the Furious.” And afterwards I’ll be shaking my head, as I do almost every summer.

The purpose of the summer blockbuster is to suspend our belief for a brief period of time and entertain us. But when we reach the point that even summer moviegoers start frowning, not even the lowest of low expectations aren’t being met.

It’s a shame, but the most I have to look forward to at the moment is “Snakes on a Plane.”