Meh, I don't agree. Scott Pilgrim shares nothing with Sin City (other than being a comic first) and the way it protrayed it's comic movie style was completely different. Inception is the same way for me, I cannot connect movies where one is about the mind and none of the psuedo-religious "the one" crap and the other is about technology.
It's easy to just draw a flimsy line between a couple of movies because they were comics first or deal in an alternate reality. The reality though is that both of these stories and how they were presented were original. Whether people just want to use the phrase "fresh" instaed of "original" is no big deal to me but I would go so far as to say that to just come out with a blanket statement of "there are no original ideas and this is a fact" is lazy and dismissive.
Look, laugh at me for this, I dont care, but as someone who wants to make films in the future, i've tried so hard to come up with original ideas. Everytime I do, it's always too this movie, or too that movie, to a point where if I make it, people will just call it a rip off.
Look at Avatar. I mean, it's "original" in the sense that there's new characters, a new setting...but the story is so unoriginal, and uninspired you automaticly know what is going to happen. Why? Because you've seen it. You've seen Avatar before....it's an incredibly basic story.
Also, look at Star Wars, not an original movie at all. A lot of stuff was taken from various films and stories...but it was done in such a unique way that it came off as original.
Also, you cant call Scott Pilgram original because it was based off a comic book. And while you cant call Inception a rip-off or remake of the Matrix, it does share a lot of story elements. Dreams, alternate realities of the mind, "a program" in Inception's case, Mal....
That's not a bad thing. The movie was so incredibly brilliant, that it took these ideas and expanded upon them to a point where they werent that obvious.
Everything inspires everything.
I don't know if that sounds good. 
