ZERO
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,933
|
Post by ZERO on May 30, 2014 3:18:52 GMT -5
As much as I love and defend the Saw franchise (well, most of it, anyway), I can't deny that the sequels didn't need to happen, cheapened the unique aspects of the first film and yes, even I admit the quality of the films went downhill very fast and very strongly (aside from 4 which I still say is the second best film in the series). If the rumours of a reboot are true then is hope they can remember what the original such a classic: likeable characters, minimalistic style and a tense atmosphere. Wrong Turn. Forgettable film gets an inexplicable amount of forgettable and increasingly silly sequels, and not even the fun kind of silly. Saw, I'm like you - I enjoy the sequels (and they surprisingly managed to keep a pretty consistent continuity for seven films, which is more than I can say for some other "classic" franchises), but that film stands alone so well. Perhaps because it was supposed to. Saw II didn't even start life as a Saw movie. Wrong Turn, I never saw any of the sequels, only the first movie. I enjoyed it, but I will watch any old shit if Eliza Dushku is in it. I even sat through Bring It On for her.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on May 30, 2014 3:23:21 GMT -5
A Nightmare on Elm Street
It suffers from the same problem as other slashers. If the villain can never be beaten, then what's the point? They eventually become less about the fight to stop the killer, and simply indulging the base instincts of the audience to see the victims killed in every more gruesome and elaborate ways with each sequel.
|
|
The Unconquered Sun
King Koopa
He has no pants! What a heathen!
Lord of Storms and Kittens!
Posts: 11,548
|
Post by The Unconquered Sun on May 30, 2014 3:39:46 GMT -5
Predator, after the 1st one the rest of the movies felt like a money grab.
|
|
|
Post by I'm Team Bayley and Indi on May 30, 2014 6:08:11 GMT -5
The Skulls, I don't think the world was crying out for three of them
|
|
hassanchop
Grimlock
Who are you to doubt Belldandy?
Posts: 14,774
|
Post by hassanchop on May 30, 2014 8:09:23 GMT -5
Just remembered a big one. Psycho. The story was told in the first one, we didn't need more. Would you agree with that if they had actually adapted the author of the original book's version of Psycho II? Because that book was trying to say a lot of the violent stuff like slasher and gory bloody films were unnecessary. He was going to attack a Hollywood production team making a movie based on his life. I guess the studio wasn't having that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2014 8:26:36 GMT -5
The Bad News Bears didn't need to win the championship game to prove they belonged, and it should have stopped there. There are just too many flaws in the two films and the TV show that came about afterward.
Others: Major League, The Mighty Ducks, The Sandlot (not awful sequels, but they weren't needed) and The Parent Trap. (The Parent Trap had two "sequels" 25 years after the original. Disney just can't keep screwing with stuff.)
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,159
|
Post by agent817 on May 30, 2014 8:46:36 GMT -5
I agree with this even though I liked D2 as a kid. I didn't care for D3 all too much. I watched the first movie about a week ago for the first time in years and I can still enjoy it. I haven't watched D2 in a while but I may need to in order to see how it holds up. It had its flaws (I mean, seriously, Iceland not only has a hockey team, but are also the villains in the movie? Why not Canada or any other country who are known for being great at hockey?), but it was enjoyable. The problem with D3 is that for some strange reason, The Ducks had gone to some prep school and now they have to prove themselves there? It's one thing for the first movie to prove themselves in pee-wee hockey and manage to win a regional championship. The second one, while I wasn't sure that they were THAT good enough to compete in the Junior Goodwill Games, but they made the big time and managed to win the gold for that. Now they are at some prep school and dealing with the varsity douchebags? Plus, aren't they all technically on the same side if they represent the same school? Why have them go at it with the varsity team? Also, Emilio Estevez was given top billing but he wasn't in the movie that much.
|
|
|
Post by Freddy BooJangles on May 30, 2014 8:54:57 GMT -5
I have no problem with film franchises having sequels(especially those that I like) as long as they're not offensively bad (like unwatchably bad)
|
|
|
Post by revolver86 on May 30, 2014 14:32:12 GMT -5
Every once in a while, I watch Episode IV and think Star Wars. It's like a perfect movie top to bottom and the only thing that keeps people from dissagreeing is how much better Empire was. Those two films are the peak and it's all downhill from there.
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on May 30, 2014 15:16:38 GMT -5
Controversy time: IRON MAN. Only the first movie was the really good one of the series. Ditto Austin Powers.
Considering what happened to Michael Myers after, maybe we should have stuck with the anthology series of movies idea for Halloween. Halloween III > Thorn Cult; Scream 3.5, er, Halloween H20; Busta Rhymes owning Michael; and the Rob Zombie bastardization.
Here's an easy one: the LITTLE RASCALS MOVIE got a sequel recently. Dunno how the Brady Bunch movies were post-Very Brady Sequel, but I can imagine them getting long in the tooth. And if we're counting movies that had one or two good sequels before going to pot, let me just mention one word: PREQUELS. OK, two more: CRYSTAL SKULL.
Oh and how can I forget A CHRISTMAS FREAKIN' STORY 2?!!? The movies they did with the Parkers before that were excusable because they were still based on Jean Shepherd's works. But this low budget D2V nightmare that isn't good enough to be on Ion? Not so much.
TLBT vs. Flintstones vs. WWE: BOOK IT!
Which reminds me, also...All Dogs Go to Heaven.
|
|
|
Post by Rumble McSkirmish on May 30, 2014 16:59:34 GMT -5
Slap Shot: We go from Paul Newman to one of the Baldwin Bros to whomever starred in the third one. Sure the Hanson Bros will still there, but even their gimmick cannot carry three movies and even worse the third movie was PG so they had tone it down which kind of kills the point of the characters.
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on May 30, 2014 17:05:28 GMT -5
I agree with this even though I liked D2 as a kid. I didn't care for D3 all too much. I watched the first movie about a week ago for the first time in years and I can still enjoy it. I haven't watched D2 in a while but I may need to in order to see how it holds up. It had its flaws (I mean, seriously, Iceland not only has a hockey team, but are also the villains in the movie? Why not Canada or any other country who are known for being great at hockey?), but it was enjoyable. The problem with D3 is that for some strange reason, The Ducks had gone to some prep school and now they have to prove themselves there? It's one thing for the first movie to prove themselves in pee-wee hockey and manage to win a regional championship. The second one, while I wasn't sure that they were THAT good enough to compete in the Junior Goodwill Games, but they made the big time and managed to win the gold for that. Now they are at some prep school and dealing with the varsity douchebags? Plus, aren't they all technically on the same side if they represent the same school? Why have them go at it with the varsity team? Also, Emilio Estevez was given top billing but he wasn't in the movie that much. from what I understand, Iceland (*snicker*)was chosen because they didn't want to alienate viewers in any country where Hockey is a big deal. as if Canadians would somehow find the idea of being portrayed as a world-beating ice hockey superpower alienating .
|
|
|
Post by BJ Sturgeon on May 30, 2014 17:05:50 GMT -5
Exorcist, even if the third one is quite good. Not good enough to make me forget the awfulness of the second one though.
|
|
The Unconquered Sun
King Koopa
He has no pants! What a heathen!
Lord of Storms and Kittens!
Posts: 11,548
|
Post by The Unconquered Sun on May 30, 2014 18:48:20 GMT -5
The was absolutely no reason for a second Caddyshack movie! NONE!
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,159
|
Post by agent817 on May 30, 2014 21:16:21 GMT -5
I agree with this even though I liked D2 as a kid. I didn't care for D3 all too much. I watched the first movie about a week ago for the first time in years and I can still enjoy it. I haven't watched D2 in a while but I may need to in order to see how it holds up. It had its flaws (I mean, seriously, Iceland not only has a hockey team, but are also the villains in the movie? Why not Canada or any other country who are known for being great at hockey?), but it was enjoyable. The problem with D3 is that for some strange reason, The Ducks had gone to some prep school and now they have to prove themselves there? It's one thing for the first movie to prove themselves in pee-wee hockey and manage to win a regional championship. The second one, while I wasn't sure that they were THAT good enough to compete in the Junior Goodwill Games, but they made the big time and managed to win the gold for that. Now they are at some prep school and dealing with the varsity douchebags? Plus, aren't they all technically on the same side if they represent the same school? Why have them go at it with the varsity team? Also, Emilio Estevez was given top billing but he wasn't in the movie that much. from what I understand, Iceland (*snicker*)was chosen because they didn't want to alienate viewers in any country where Hockey is a big deal. as if Canadians would somehow find the idea of being portrayed as a world-beating ice hockey superpower alienating . If anything, it would have given Canadians a stroke to the ego, like pride.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,159
|
Post by agent817 on May 31, 2014 11:35:13 GMT -5
I was wondering about this. Would you guys say that "Beverly Hills Cop" didn't really need to be a franchise? The first one is a classic, I liked the second one, and the third, well that was not a good movie at all.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on May 31, 2014 13:01:02 GMT -5
A Nightmare on Elm Street It suffers from the same problem as other slashers. If the villain can never be beaten, then what's the point? They eventually become less about the fight to stop the killer, and simply indulging the base instincts of the audience to see the victims killed in every more gruesome and elaborate ways with each sequel. I'd actually say that of all the slashers, I thought Elm Street had the ability to be the most creative, so I had no issue overall. However, the execution (no pun intended) was poorly done in most of them. It was actually the camp value that kept them somewhat enjoyable. Now take something like Friday the 13th...it took like 6 movies to make them watchable.
|
|
Glitch
King Koopa
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,714
|
Post by Glitch on May 31, 2014 16:52:51 GMT -5
FAN the movie. The first barely qualified as a movie, so no real need for five more of them.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hawkfield no1 NZ poster on Jun 4, 2014 5:45:53 GMT -5
Starship Troopers.
The first one was awesome (it barely made its budget back so they could of easily said no to a sequel) but the sequels were terrible. Hero of the Federation was a shitty Aliens rip off and while Marauder did at least attempt to replicate the satire and action of the first movie. They were never going to be able to pull it off with only 1/5th of the original's budget.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Woodrow on Jun 4, 2014 5:54:55 GMT -5
FAN the movie. The first barely qualified as a movie, so no real need for five more of them. But the world needed my moonlit full frontal song & dance number in FAN 3: The FANenning
|
|