I haven't read those, but sometimes something can be good without being terribly original. I liked "'Salem's Lot", for example, yet there was nothing original about it. Most Fantasy uses themes and plots that were used by Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, and Tolkien, yet are quite good. Sherlock Holmes wasn't even all that original (that character type was created by Poe). Shakespeare's plots were not all that original. If you want originality, you have to dig far back in history and read things on the order of Gilgamesh.
Sometimes, a rehash of an old theme can bring that theme back into focus for a new generation. "Frankenstein" had a fantastic theme (well, themes, actually if you really dig), but who actually reads that book these days (other than me)? Stories need to be redone every generation, I think.
I think dismissing a good book due to a lack of originality would dismiss much great literature in history. How were the themes presented? Was it well written and enjoyable? Was the story effective? Those are more relevant questions.
Two of your examples, "The Matrix" and "The X-Files" post date the books he mentions. Yet, from what I understand, "the Matrix" was good, despite its lack of originality. Heck, I borrowed from other sources and accidentally duplicated the plot of the Matrix in a D&D adventure! It wasn't all that original either, apparently (I still haven't seen it).
