Chekhov's gun
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
This is just my personal view, of course, and to each his own. But I personally can say that having seen the inner clockwork of fiction, I would not go back and have it any other way. (And many other agree with me: There are many internet communities devoted to understanding and explaining literature's inner workings, the most well known of which is tvtropes. I heartily recommend it to anyone interested in plumbing the full depth of literature's workings.)
The lack of predictability and formulas are the exact reason that Tarantino and Koen Brothers movies are valued so highly by critics. Chekhov's gun is a commonly used excuse for poor, predictable screenwriting when not used sparsely. It feels like solving a puzzle that is already laid out in front of your eyes to me. Unfortunately, the ingredients of a blockbuster nowadays consist out of flashy CGI, lens flares and constant-climax soundtracks. I think it's no coincidence recent movies and series with a good plot are based on books.
[1] http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2013/07/hollyw...