|
Post by BorneAgain on Jan 16, 2016 18:15:33 GMT -5
It figures they'd send one of the few decent Disney sequels directly to video, while unleashing Jungle Book 2 on poor theatrical audiences.
What's funny is that I recall Siskel and Ebert reviewing Lion King II, which is what made me believe it got a theatrical release.
|
|
|
Post by G✇JI☈A on Jan 16, 2016 18:23:52 GMT -5
The Rage: Carrie 2
It came out about twenty years after the original Brian De Palma version of the Stephen King story. Except for a flashback scene the Carrie character wasn't even in it.
|
|
|
Post by psychokiller on Jan 16, 2016 18:33:23 GMT -5
Basic Instinct 2 Anacondas: The Hunt For The Blood Orchid Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Jan 16, 2016 18:36:34 GMT -5
None of the Bring It On sequels were theatrically released in the States.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Jan 16, 2016 18:55:44 GMT -5
The Leprechaun sequels.
|
|
|
Post by psychokiller on Jan 16, 2016 19:44:56 GMT -5
Only part 2 was in theaters. The rest were direct to dvd.
|
|
|
Post by Gremlin on Jan 16, 2016 20:16:32 GMT -5
Spitballing here, but Tron Legacy, just for the time frame.
|
|
the2ndevil
Grimlock
Super Seducer Survivor
Where Is Your Santa, Now?
Posts: 13,629
|
Post by the2ndevil on Jan 16, 2016 21:22:37 GMT -5
The Rage: Carrie 2 It came out about twenty years after the original Brian De Palma version of the Stephen King story. Except for a flashback scene the Carrie character wasn't even in it. I'm convinced that whole Carrie connection was forced onto the movie by the studio after the fact.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,360
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Jan 16, 2016 21:37:58 GMT -5
How has Highlander 2 not been listed yet? This fits the bill in 2 ways:
1) As much as I actually like the first film, it was a box office failure. The fact that they decided to do a sequel was surprising by itself.
2) The movie itself was completely baffling. They presented the immortals, who were explained as an enigma of existence in the original film, as unkillable aliens that could be resurrected simply by having the immortal who holds the dead immortals quickening wish the guy back into existence. It was so, so, so bad.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Jan 16, 2016 23:02:51 GMT -5
Major League: Back to the Minors. The first film is a classic and the second film was ok, but was this one really neccesary?
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jan 17, 2016 2:07:22 GMT -5
After Transformers 2 Revenge of the Whatever the Transformers series should have ended and Michael Bay imprisoned for crimes against humanity As horrible as all of those movies are, for some unfathomable reason they keep making massive amounts of money. Even as someone who hates them with a passion, continuing to make them is sound business sense.
|
|
Some Guy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,117
Member is Online
|
Post by Some Guy on Jan 17, 2016 3:17:40 GMT -5
The Matrix sequals. The first movie was made in 1999. All of its good idea were copied by pretty much every other movie and were dated and tired by the time the sequels were announced. It also didn't leave room for a sequel. Everything was resolved in the first movie and resolved well. It truly is a great movie. The Matrix Reloaded was released in 2003, 4 years after the first. It was wayyy too late and adding to the fact that it was a tired cliche by this point, the move stunk. It took the story in a new direction.....and failed miserably. Frankly it was for the most part..boring. It was a clear cash in and was the last Matrix movie. The Wachowski Brothers would have been much better off doing a new movie with new characters in that universe. I don't really understand your point here. They both came with immense hype, and sure they weren't very good but it's not like they're Son of the Mask. They were big budget sequels that made money. That weird ass Star Wars Clone Wars movie that got thrown into theaters has always confused me.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 17, 2016 3:37:20 GMT -5
The Matrix sequals. The first movie was made in 1999. All of its good idea were copied by pretty much every other movie and were dated and tired by the time the sequels were announced. It also didn't leave room for a sequel. Everything was resolved in the first movie and resolved well. It truly is a great movie. The Matrix Reloaded was released in 2003, 4 years after the first. It was wayyy too late and adding to the fact that it was a tired cliche by this point, the move stunk. It took the story in a new direction.....and failed miserably. Frankly it was for the most part..boring. It was a clear cash in and was the last Matrix movie. The Wachowski Brothers would have been much better off doing a new movie with new characters in that universe. I don't really understand your point here. They both came with immense hype, and sure they weren't very good but it's not like they're Son of the Mask. They were big budget sequels that made money. That weird ass Star Wars Clone Wars movie that got thrown into theaters has always confused me. I think that was originally meant to be a TV movie... for some reason they decided to give it a theatrical release... for reasons
|
|
|
Post by Danimal on Jan 17, 2016 4:32:10 GMT -5
Major League: Back to the Minors. The first film is a classic and the second film was ok, but was this one really necessary? Totally seemed like a straight-to-video sequel that they decided to give a theatrical release to at the last minute.
|
|
wakko
Samurai Cop
Knows This
BAAAGH!!!!
Posts: 2,212
|
Post by wakko on Jan 17, 2016 4:59:17 GMT -5
I'll very loudly confess that Alvin & the Chipmunks 3 seemed like an odd theatrical release to me, but it's done pretty well for itself in the Star Wars-overwhelmed box office. That is actually the 4th Alvin & The Chipmunks movie. Suprised they made four.
|
|
|
Post by DoubleDare on Jan 17, 2016 5:44:46 GMT -5
Every Final Destination movie since 3.
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Jan 17, 2016 7:26:18 GMT -5
Major League: Back to the Minors. The first film is a classic and the second film was ok, but was this one really necessary? Totally seemed like a straight-to-video sequel that they decided to give a theatrical release to at the last minute. I still haven't seen that movie. Mostly because I don't want it to make me think less of Scott Bakula.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jan 17, 2016 13:40:06 GMT -5
Major League: Back to the Minors. The first film is a classic and the second film was ok, but was this one really necessary? Totally seemed like a straight-to-video sequel that they decided to give a theatrical release to at the last minute. That's what I thought, until I saw the budget for that piece of shit was $46 million. That's $11 million more than the total combined budget for the first two movies. The mind boggles.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Jan 17, 2016 14:37:47 GMT -5
The Rage: Carrie 2 It came out about twenty years after the original Brian De Palma version of the Stephen King story. Except for a flashback scene the Carrie character wasn't even in it. I'm convinced that whole Carrie connection was forced onto the movie by the studio after the fact. Nope. It was advertised as such before it ever started filming, and why they cast the one survivor from the original in it.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkshi Tanahashi on Jan 17, 2016 22:53:11 GMT -5
Totally seemed like a straight-to-video sequel that they decided to give a theatrical release to at the last minute. That's what I thought, until I saw the budget for that piece of shit was $46 million. That's $11 million more than the total combined budget for the first two movies. The mind boggles. Seriously!? Where did the money go?
|
|