|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 11th, 2005, 01:59 PM
|
#31 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 356
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 02:02 PM
|
#32 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 356
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 02:13 PM
|
#33 | ||
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 32° 44' N 117° 10' W
Posts: 820
|
Quote:
Quote:
What's to argue? You can argue all you want; it's not going to change my opinion on it. Look; I have no idea how many sequels have been made. If you do, hook up with the list and we can go through it. My underlying point is that chalking it up to 'well, sequels generally suck' is a cop out and a poor excuse for a film to be bad. It doesn't matter if ole George is trying hard or the W Bros are trying; the final result is ass on a stick. The list I provided is arguably a good list but I ain't gonna argue with you over it. It may be uncommon for a film sequel not to live up to the original's standard's but we can come up with a laundry list of competent sequels for sure. It's not simply one or 2 anamolies we're talking about. So yeah; I'd definately say it's not entirely UNCOMMON. To be clear; I'm not saying any of those sequels are better (unless I point it out) but they sure are right up there. Last edited by John Hudson; August 11th, 2005 at 02:48 PM. Reason: Grammar, spelling and choice of words... |
||
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 03:35 PM
|
#34 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 356
|
Quote:
Your list of 23 films consititutes .3% of all sequels ever made, though granted you picked some more well known, and more recent sequels, and weren't attempting to go through the entirety of film history. However, if you go through that list in its entirety, I think you'll be hard pressed to find 150 good sequels. Yes, I would say that good sequels are exceeding uncommon, if for no other reason than genuinely good movies are fairly uncommon as well, most films being of average quality. That being said, I wouldn't suggest it as a reason why it's okay for sequels not to be good films, I'm just saying it's not surprising. My point was that the people making the sequels are generally trying to make good films when they're making sequels, and if the movies aren't as good as they might want them to be, well, that's the way it goes. Everyone wants their story to be great, but that is often outside of a persons individual control. |
|
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 03:53 PM
|
#35 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 32° 44' N 117° 10' W
Posts: 820
|
Okay there Josuha. You need to take a long look at that list/link you just provided. I have to throw this out and declare it inadmissable.
If you wan't to add up and count all of those films listed (including the epic Made For Video A.n.a.l. 2: Not for P***ies) then that's fine. Not sure of the validity of the list as it is? It list straight to video porn titles, made for television, television series, video game titles, cartoons, foriegn films of which I cannot pronounce nor have heard of... Find us a Valid movie sequel list will ya? And I sure as hell ain't talking about American Ninja 4 or Anal Intruder 7. We're talking film sequels to films that were good in the first place not 'Who's your Daddy 3'. As far as finding 150 films on the list; I can't think of 100 great films in the first place much less a 150 sequels; jeez. Awesome. |
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 05:03 PM
|
#36 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 356
|
Quote:
I'm pretty sure we were just talking about sequels being good in the first place, and how many good sequels there are versus sequels made - which I did. So now you want to change the criteria to how many sequels to good movies are good, which first of all becomes extremely subjective when determining what is a good movie in the first place, much less a sequel to a good movie. Certainly there are plenty of people who would place Evil Dead II and Friday the 13th part 2 in with American Ninja 4. If you want to place specific limits on the films involved in order to find the sequels - and it seems you want to talk specifically and only about major Hollywood releases - your percentage of sequels as decent films will go up, but not a huge amount. |
|
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 05:15 PM
|
#37 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 32° 44' N 117° 10' W
Posts: 820
|
Am I missing something here?
You seem to be fixated on this. Is something going on here? You seem bothered; manic almost. Why don't we let this go, huh? Not sure if I said something that got to you here or maybe somewhere else? It's appearing to be a pissing contest on your end; trollish. Your hanging onto words, spouting stats, latching on with no intention of ever letting go.... I replied simply to your 'it's not uncommon for film sequels to lack' with a 'too true' reply but thought a bit more about it and came up with arguably a laundry list of solid sequels (not better than ever; but competent sequels) with my underlying point being "Hollywood is more than capable of making good sequels..." and now your going Rainman on me. I think we can all generally agree what is considered a 'Good Hollywood Film' and what sequels spawned were of quaility, hmmm? Should I just say 'You're right' about whatever it is you wan't to be right about? (You tell me.) I'll make this easy for you Let's move on. Jeez. |
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 06:36 PM
|
#38 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Loveland, Colorado, USA
Posts: 292
|
Quote:
I think I should argue more with you John. :)
__________________
" When some wild-eyed, eight foot tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head against a bar room wall, and looks you crooked in the eye, and he asks you if you've payed your dues, well, you just stare that big suker right back in the eye, and you remember what old Jack Burton always says at a time like that, 'Have you paid your dues, Jack? Yes sir, the check is in the mail." |
|
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 09:34 PM
|
#39 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 121
|
Hey Joshua, don't want to get off topic, but to answer your question, yes I do think the main emphasis with the two matrix sequels was to make money. Looking at the two sequels, it's not hard to visualize one movie without a lot of the fluff and irrelevant parts each contained. More to the point, after the sleeper success of the original "Matrix" it was well publicized that WB had asked the W Bros. to decide on sequel or sequels; they decided on two sequels. Why? Obviously for the money, since there hadn't even been talk of sequels before the film had been screened and most thought it would have amounted to "just ok." But, feel free to disagree.
On topic. The list John provided is a pretty good list and I think we all agree that good sequels can be done, though I will submit that we were speaking of feature films and not straight to video releases; there is an obvious difference in the quality of discussion one can have with a name like "Anal Intruder 7." My rumination about sequels illustrates my thinking that it is harder to create the same reaction to a sequel because the awe factor is lessened; think Jurassic Park. In my opinion, a sequel is always made for money, unless the source material requires a sequel (LOTR), or the original story was crafted to be one in a series (any superhero movie). Don't even get me started on Sin City, which I think was visually good, but a poor movie (and I did own the source comics at one point). I've already said in another RR thread that I think RR rips himself off, so he's always on the lookout to create money, not original movies. Off Topic One series no one mentioned, Austin Powers. What do you guys think of those movies? How about American Pie? I heard there's to be a part 4? Do we really need a part 4? On Topic Star Wars was such a classic in so many ways and had so much to draw from, it's hard for me to believe that George messed up so badly with Episodes I, II, and III (here I am without a feature film credit to my name criticizing a film Icon, the internet is so great huh!). Lots of people said the pay off was worth it, but was it really? From a purely technical perspective, I'm always going to have respect for what George has accomplished, but I do feel he lowered Star Wars from that pedestal it's been on since we first visited that galaxy far far away with those prequels. I will always be sad about that nagging question, what if? But to come back to reality, would anyone want to see episodes 7, 8, and 9? Regardless of whether George was involved or not? |
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 09:51 PM
|
#40 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Loveland, Colorado, USA
Posts: 292
|
Quote:
__________________
" When some wild-eyed, eight foot tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head against a bar room wall, and looks you crooked in the eye, and he asks you if you've payed your dues, well, you just stare that big suker right back in the eye, and you remember what old Jack Burton always says at a time like that, 'Have you paid your dues, Jack? Yes sir, the check is in the mail." |
|
|
|
|
|
August 11th, 2005, 11:18 PM
|
#41 |
|
Air China Pilot
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 2,389
|
I think from a creator's standpoint, a good reason to make a sequel is that you want to continue the story of characters and settings that you love.
"Aliens" for one. James Cameron moved that series in a different direction. It had a new theme, it had a different style, yet it was the same universe. He did it very well. Now, I prefer the original "Alien" but I still respect "Aliens" a lot. It blew me away as a 16 year old.
__________________
-- Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com | stuff about living in Vancouver | My Flickr photo gallery |
|
|
|
|
August 12th, 2005, 12:03 AM
|
#42 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 121
|
Hey Michael. Yeah I hear yah man, and I agree. The internet has really allowed people to interact in more ways - not all good of course - but, I think it's great!
Hey Keith. I agree and Alien/s I also like - Alien scared the $h!t out of me, I was only what, maybe 7 when I saw it, that darn alien bursting outta the guys stomach had me almost peeing my pants man! Another sequel which I think is as good as the orginal is T2. Both Terminator and T2 rocked! But, I do think that somewhere along the line most sequels get made for money and not so much for the merit of the story. I wouldn't care really provided they were all great, or even good, movies. Personally I would jump at the chance of doing a sequel to any number of films on my list of favorite movies. |
|
|
|
|
August 12th, 2005, 05:56 AM
|
#43 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,195
|
I think Free Willy 2 was better then the first... :-)
I know it sounds stupid, but I mean it though :-p |
|
|
|
|
August 12th, 2005, 11:25 AM
|
#44 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 234
|
Quote:
Say, have you seen the plot synopsis ("supposedly" written by Lucas himself, wink-wink-nudge-nudge) for Episodes 7/8/9 over on www.supershadow.com ... they're worth checking out, if only for the fanboy aspect. LINKS: Star Wars Episode 7 - The Fallen Hero Star Wars Episode 8 - The Republic in Crisis Star Wars Episode 9 - Victory of the Force ;-) |
|
|
|
|
|
August 14th, 2005, 01:35 PM
|
#45 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 344
|
When are they gonna have another "Big Trouble In Little China"? The ending of that movie left it open ended, what with the Sasquatch thingy hitching a ride on Kurt Russell's rig.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
