#297996 - 06/05/2007 00:28
Sequelae
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
|
I have not seen Spiderman 1 or 2, so I figure I have to skip #3 for consistency's sake. I guess I am glad they made it, though, as it is the only thing that allowed Bob Mondello to compose the following review, which I found quite amusing (better to listen than read, I thought): http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9948266So, my general question would be: Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
_________________________
Jim
'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#297997 - 06/05/2007 01:36
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 23/09/2000
Posts: 3608
Loc: Minnetonka, MN
|
I'm with you in having never seen any of them but my spiderfan friend says #3 is the best one so far.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#297998 - 06/05/2007 02:35
Re: Sequelae
[Re: msaeger]
|
old hand
Registered: 15/02/2002
Posts: 1049
|
Quote:
I'm with you in having never seen any of them but my spiderfan friend says #3 is the best one so far.
I've seen the first two, and IMHO that wouldn't be difficult.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#297999 - 06/05/2007 02:39
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
member
Registered: 12/08/2001
Posts: 175
Loc: Atlanta
|
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
Wrath of Khan gets my vote!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298000 - 06/05/2007 05:47
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Folsom]
|
addict
Registered: 23/12/2002
Posts: 652
Loc: Winston Salem, NC
|
Quote:
Wrath of Khan gets my vote!
What? The Search for Spock didn't get you?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298001 - 06/05/2007 11:42
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3584
Loc: Columbus, OH
|
Quote:
So, my general question would be:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
Two that come to mind (and of course, even these are debatable) are:
Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
_________________________
~ John
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298002 - 06/05/2007 16:59
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
A Better Tomorrow II (and, arguably, III).
A big part of me feels like I enjoyed Underworld Evolution more than the original film, but I still can't make up my mind about it. I'm really looking forward to seeing 28 Weeks Later, though.
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298003 - 06/05/2007 18:32
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
old hand
Registered: 15/02/2002
Posts: 1049
|
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
Batman Begins
Two Towers
Empire Strikes Back
Hmmm.... good question...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298004 - 07/05/2007 00:08
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
But 28 Weeks Later doesn't have Danny Boyle directing and wasn't written by Alex Garland. I won't hold my breath, but I *will* watch it. I have a fondness for zombie-type movies. I've seen so many in the past few years I find it actually surprising. I'll also be checking out Day of the Dead when that comes out (a remake of the original sequel, not itself a sequel to the remake of the original - hope you got that). And of course the next Resident Evil movie. Empire is definitely better than the original Star Wars. Without question. I believe you'll find a majority of fans agree. There are a few other sequels I've thought were better that the originals, but I'm too tired to remember what they are right now. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298005 - 07/05/2007 00:39
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
I debate the premise of your post. Alien was a far better movie than Aliens.
However, going with the intent, many people feel The Godfather Part II was at least as good as The Godfather. Personally, I never cared that much for either one.
The Empire Strikes Back was better than Star Wars, though both were far better than Return of the Jedi.
Evil Dead 2 was better than The Evil Dead, IMO, although it's certainly debatable. This one is more than relevant, considering that they were directed by the same person as the Spider-Man films.
The second of the Jason Bourne movies of late, the ones with Matt Damon, was about as good as the first, and both were good.
A Shot in the Dark is far better than The Pink Panther.
I'm sure you can name any number of Bond films that were better than Dr. No. Many far worse, too.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298006 - 07/05/2007 00:43
Re: Sequelae
[Re: TigerJimmy]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 19/09/2002
Posts: 2494
Loc: East Coast, USA
|
Quote:
Empire Strikes Back
Agreed. Still have no idea why I like this middle child.
Quote:
Two Towers
No way. "Fellowship of the Ring" was such a colorful pallet, containing every texture of fantasy film that I can think of. "Two Towers" (and "Return of the King", in a way) seemed so monotone. Battle, dark, mud, battle; repeat.
Terminator 2 (though I never saw the first)
How about most amazingly drastically WORST sequel of a movie:
Mission Impossible 2 - hands down the worst big budget film ever created. I could go on for hours about how it cowers in comparison to the original.
_________________________
- FireFox31 110gig MKIIa (30+80), Eutronix lights, 32 meg stacked RAM, Filener orange gel lens, Greenlights Lit Buttons green set
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298007 - 07/05/2007 00:59
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
I suppose these are probably spoilers. Most of this stuff is in the trailers, I think, but just in case....
Spoiler:
V unir abg lrg frra gur zbivr, ohg sbe gur fnxr bs orvat n pbzvp-obbx trrx, V'yy cbvag bhg gung obgu Uneel Bfobea orpbzvat gur frpbaq Terra Tboyva naq gur onfvp fgbel bs gur oynpx fhvg, vapyhqvat Rqqvr Oebpx, ner gnxra qverpgyl sebz gur pbzvpf. Nygubhtu gurl nera'g eryngrq va nal cnegvphyne jnl va gur pbzvpf. V qba'g xabj jung gur zbivr'f fgbelyvar vf, ohg Fnaqzna vf pregnvayl n ybat-gvzr Fcvqre-Zna ivyynva, qngvat onpx gb gur 60f. Terra Tboyva VV qngrf onpx gb gur rneyl 70f. Gur oynpx fhvg qngrf onpx gb nobhg 1985, jvgu Rqqvr Oebpx va gur oynpx fhvg qngvat gb gur yngr 80f.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298008 - 07/05/2007 01:00
Re: Sequelae
[Re: FireFox31]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
Mission Impossible 2 - hands down the worst big budget film ever created. I could go on for hours about how it cowers in comparison to the original.
Wow. That says a lot, considering that the first one was a gigantic turd on film.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298009 - 07/05/2007 01:03
Re: Sequelae
[Re: FireFox31]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
Terminator 2 (though I never saw the first)
How can you say that the one you saw was better than the one you didn't see? Personally, I think you're totally wrong.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298010 - 07/05/2007 01:15
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 19/09/2002
Posts: 2494
Loc: East Coast, USA
|
Quote:
Terminator 2 (though I never saw the first)
::shrug:: I thought T2 was a very well done film. It is still impressive for its age. Yes, I should see the original.
Yes, MI2 is "Just That Bad".
_________________________
- FireFox31 110gig MKIIa (30+80), Eutronix lights, 32 meg stacked RAM, Filener orange gel lens, Greenlights Lit Buttons green set
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298011 - 07/05/2007 01:50
Re: Sequelae
[Re: FireFox31]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Quote:
Mission Impossible 2 - hands down the worst big budget film ever created.
Woah woah woah! Did you see Armageddon?
Better sequels. Hmm. Most of the ones I'd say have been posted.
Empire Strikes Back
Godfather Part II
Spiderman 2 (although I hated the first one, so it had nowhere to go but up)
Evil Dead 2
Not mentioned:
X-Men 2
Blade 2
I wanted to comment on some others that were mentioned:
Quote:
The second of the Jason Bourne movies of late, the ones with Matt Damon, was about as good as the first, and both were good.
Agreed, they seem to excellently done. I can't wait for the third, because I'm sure it'll be just as good as the others. I don't care if it's better or not, I just want to see it. Have you seen the trailer? Spoiler:
"V erzrzore...rirelguvat."
Quote:
Batman Begins
Sorry, I don't consider this a sequel (or prequel) in any way. It has absolutely nothing to do with any other Batman film and stands on its own. We'll have to see whether or not The Dark Knight tops it. I think that depends on whether Mr Ledger can pass as the Joker (a big task).
Quote:
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Really? Better than Raiders? I won't argue about the second movie, though.
Edited by Dignan (07/05/2007 01:51)
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298012 - 07/05/2007 02:16
Re: Sequelae
[Re: FireFox31]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31596
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Empire Strikes Back
Agreed. Still have no idea why I like this middle child.
Because it's the one that Lucas didn't write or direct.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298013 - 07/05/2007 02:19
Re: Sequelae
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Empire Strikes Back
Agreed. Still have no idea why I like this middle child.
Because it's the one that Lucas didn't write or direct.
He also didn't write the screenplay nor did he direct Return of the Jedi.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298014 - 07/05/2007 02:23
Re: Sequelae
[Re: drakino]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31596
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
... and it didn't have Ewoks.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298015 - 07/05/2007 03:09
Re: Sequelae
[Re: tfabris]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 20/01/2002
Posts: 2085
Loc: New Orleans, LA
|
At least it didn't have jar-jar... The ewoks were bad, but jar-jar was a travesty.
Anyway, Ocean's Twelve was as good or better than Ocean's Eleven, IMHO.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298016 - 07/05/2007 03:14
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
I debate the premise of your post. Alien was a far better movie than Aliens.
Oh, goodie. I was hoping somebody wouldn't let that slide!
I suppose I should also have modified my question to to stipulate that the original movie had to be very good. I would not be very impressed by a sequel that improved on a crummy original.
I cherish both Alien and Aliens. I can see where you might judge the former to be superior. What pleases me, though, is that they are very different movies with the same core (Ripley); trying to make Alien 2 along the same lines as the original would have failed. The effect is lost after the first viewing, but I have a hard time thinking of a more exciting moment in cinema than a certain appearance of Lance Henriksen in Aliens. If this somehow reveals me to be a sucker for formulaic adventure flicks, I guess I'll plead guilty.
Oh, and "Get away from her you bitch!"
Killer.
_________________________
Jim
'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298017 - 07/05/2007 05:08
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5546
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
|
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
Terminator 2
The dream sequence in the playground...
tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298018 - 07/05/2007 05:10
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5546
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
|
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
Terminator 2.
The dream sequence in the playground...
tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#298019 - 07/05/2007 15:00
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 06/04/2005
Posts: 2026
Loc: Seattle transplant
|
Quote:
Other than "Aliens", what movie sequels have ever equaled or exceeded the original movie?
Mad Max / Road Warrior (Beyond Thunderdome = meh, MM4 = nevasawit)
Godzilla (originals- all sequels equal the crap of the first)
Indiana Jones movies were all good, but I'm not sure if you really want to call them anything other than a trilogy (ie: not a series of original, sequel 1, sequel 2).
In my 'try as they might' section:
None of the Cannonball series tops Gumball Rally, although C1 was a fun romp.
Highlander- there can be only one... shoulda taken those words to heart.
_________________________
10101311 (20GB- backup empeg)
10101466 (2x60GB, Eutronix/GreenLights Blue) (Stolen!)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298020 - 07/05/2007 15:47
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 25/08/2000
Posts: 2413
Loc: NH USA
|
Spectacularly bad sequels:
Caddyshack 2
Meaballs 2
-Zeke
edit: Cool, this is post 111111 in O/T.
Edited by Ezekiel (07/05/2007 15:48)
_________________________
WWFSMD?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298021 - 07/05/2007 19:18
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Robotic]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 30/04/2000
Posts: 3810
|
Quote:
Highlander- there can be only one... shoulda taken those words to heart.
If ever there was a Worst Sequel Ever, it would have to be Highlander 2: The Quickening. Oh my that sucked in a spectacular fashion.
Maybe I'm just weird, but I still think the original Star Wars was the best of all six films. It's one of the few films I can happily watch again and again. And, pretty much any Star Trek film is better than the original one, although I broadly subscribe to the even-numbered theory. (Khan!!!)
Meanwhile, I suppose there's another category we're missing: Thank heavens they didn't try to make a sequel to:
- The Princess Bride (where on earth do you take it from there?)
- The various and sundry Pixar films
- Blade Runner & most other decent sci-fi films (can you imagine Abyss 2?)
Some ideas are best unsullied with any attempt at sequelization.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298023 - 07/05/2007 20:19
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Dignan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31596
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
I actually really liked Toy Story 2. It found a key element that made TS1 so fun (Buzz having to deal with the fact that he's a toy rather than a real space hero), and allowed the same character arc to happen again in the sequel (another buzz gets unboxed).
I was hoping they'd do the same with MIB2. MIB1 had Will Smith having to come to terms with the fact that aliens were real, and they were able to do the same thing in MIB2 by having Tommy Lee Jones' memory erased. While that part of it was fun, other aspects of the sequel made it less fun than the first one.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298024 - 07/05/2007 20:25
Re: Sequelae
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
Quote:
I was hoping they'd do the same with MIB2. MIB1 had Will Smith having to come to terms with the fact that aliens were real, and they were able to do the same thing in MIB2 by having Tommy Lee Jones' memory erased.
I don't remember that happening at all. Probably blinded by all the Burger King ads though to really pay attention.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298025 - 07/05/2007 20:33
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Ezekiel]
|
veteran
Registered: 21/01/2002
Posts: 1380
Loc: Erie, CO
|
Good sequels? I liked Mallrats, Chasing Amy and Dogma equally, I thought they were as good if not better than Clerks. Quote:
Spectacularly bad sequels
The Crow sequels were horrid.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298026 - 07/05/2007 21:05
Re: Sequelae
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 30/04/2000
Posts: 3810
|
Yeah, Toy Story 2 could well have been much worse (particularly if Disney had made it on their own without Pixar's help). Still, the non-sequel Pixar films have just been one amazing film after the next (even Cars, which I seemed to enjoy far more than the average reviewer). If I was forced to pick a "worst" Pixar film, it would probably be Toy Story 2 (despite it being so much better than anything to ever come from, oh, Dreamworks animation group). I was about to write a rant about the inspired awfulness of Leonard Part 6 (Bill Cosby, gone horribly, horribly wrong), but that led me to a Wikipedia page on the worst films ever. Wow. Great list.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298027 - 07/05/2007 21:35
Re: Sequelae
[Re: DWallach]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 06/04/2005
Posts: 2026
Loc: Seattle transplant
|
Quote:
Wow. Great list.
As is IMDB's bottom 100!
http://www.imdb.com/chart/bottom
Even The Milpitas Monster didn't make that.
/lives in Milpitas.
_________________________
10101311 (20GB- backup empeg)
10101466 (2x60GB, Eutronix/GreenLights Blue) (Stolen!)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298028 - 08/05/2007 01:59
Re: Sequelae
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Quote:
I actually really liked Toy Story 2.
Oh, I did as well. I didn't say otherwise! I was pointing out that there is indeed a Pixar sequel. I think Disney once put a lot of pressure on them to make more sequels (so unlike Disney, huh?), but they refused.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298029 - 08/05/2007 01:59
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Robotic]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
Quote:
Godzilla (originals- all sequels equal the crap of the first)
Wow. To each their own, I suppose. I saw (and still see) the original Godzilla film as an amazing piece of art. I mean, when you put it in context (two years after the end of the American Occupation, after being the target of multiple atom bombs, etc.), there's a lot of meat on them bones.
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298030 - 09/05/2007 00:04
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Dignan]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 19/09/2002
Posts: 2494
Loc: East Coast, USA
|
Gotta weigh in on Pixar (who's the only reason I even regard Disney as an entity). Toy Story 2 felt so contrieved and disjointed. But it was good. For the worst Pixar film, I'd have to struggle to say "Finding Nemo." Seriously, you can't have a Pixar/Disney film with no bad guy. And that school of fish thing was pointless (but it kept that voice actor in, which I guess was the point). Cars was an instant classic.
How do you all rate the sequels to these more time-tested films:
Jaws
Rocky
Godfather (above comment noted)
.... Police Academy??
_________________________
- FireFox31 110gig MKIIa (30+80), Eutronix lights, 32 meg stacked RAM, Filener orange gel lens, Greenlights Lit Buttons green set
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298031 - 09/05/2007 00:16
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Terminator 2 (though I never saw the first)
How can you say that the one you saw was better than the one you didn't see? Personally, I think you're totally wrong.
I think I detect a pattern: Bitt likes smaller, more intimate movies with unstoppable, murderous aliens.
I liked 'em both (T/T2), but I have to say that the nuked dream sequence mentioned by Doug in T2 was pretty stunning. At first I decided that T2 was better, but then I got a little disheartened that it had almost taken the magic out of special effects. Once it is obvious that you can do *anything*, I found myself less impressed by FX elements of movies.
One small point of order - clarification to my original post:
I consider a "sequel" to be any movie made after the original in an effort to make more money from the original concept/theme/characters/story. So, i would consider "Batman Begins" (never saw it) to be a sequel from a business/money sense.
_________________________
Jim
'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298032 - 09/05/2007 00:32
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Godzilla (originals- all sequels equal the crap of the first)
Wow. To each their own, I suppose. I saw (and still see) the original Godzilla film as an amazing piece of art. I mean, when you put it in context (two years after the end of the American Occupation, after being the target of multiple atom bombs, etc.), there's a lot of meat on them bones.
When people say "the first" I think many people refer to the original film with Raymond Burr arbitrarily spliced in. That's what I went gaga over watching TV as a kid. I didn't see the original original until a few years ago. I can't say I found it much more coherent than the Perry Mason version, but there were a few moments I found touching. I'll have to rent it.
_________________________
Jim
'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298033 - 09/05/2007 01:08
Re: Sequelae
[Re: DWallach]
|
addict
Registered: 25/06/2002
Posts: 456
|
Quote:
If ever there was a Worst Sequel Ever, it would have to be Highlander 2: The Quickening. Oh my that sucked in a spectacular fashion
Hear hear! You are as right as can be.
Highlander 2 was absolutely sucktacular.
If I recall correctly, Sean Connery managed to block its release in the U.S. for several years after it hit the theaters in Europe.
I remember wondering why he was "being a jerk" until it was finally released here.
Then I understood completely (and no longer blame him in the slightest).
Also, according to the Wikipedia link you posted, the director of Highlander 2 walked out of his own premier after 15 minutes!
...though legend has it that the entire cast of "Manos: Hands of Fate" slunk out of the middle of their premier -- appalled at the utter badness of it all.
ISTR that Highlander 3,4, The Series, etc. etc. all pretended like "Highlander 2" never existed.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298034 - 09/05/2007 01:28
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Quote:
I consider a "sequel" to be any movie made after the original in an effort to make more money from the original concept/theme/characters/story. So, i would consider "Batman Begins" (never saw it) to be a sequel from a business/money sense.
Well, I guess that's the jaded way to look at it. I prefer the artistic sense. I personally would never consider Batman Begins a sequel. Does that mean you'd consider this to be a sequel to this? I'd say it does according to your definition, but I think the general population wouldn't define it that way.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298035 - 09/05/2007 03:10
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
Bitt likes smaller, more intimate movies with unstoppable, murderous aliens.
LOL
Honestly, a lot of the time that a big-budget movie is made, they rely on the big budget. When a low-budget movie is made, they have to rely on actual story and acting. Of course, you can have low-budget movies with terrible story and acting (Manos, for example) and you can have big-budget movies with great stories and acting (Batman Begins, for example -- you should seriously rent it), but the latter are the exception and the former, well, are not the exception, but no one cares about or mentions the bad low-budget movies. Which, of course, is the way it should be for the bad big-budget movies, too, but people are overly influenced by both marketing and shiny things, so it's not.
I've largely been uninterested in special effects except for how they can contribute to the storytelling. Sure, the flashy ones are neat, but I don't watch movies to awe at big robots on screen. If a movie is just a big series of special effects, which is what many "scifi" (read "space action") movies of the last twenty years have been, I'm bored out of my skull.
In addition, there's very little I haven't seen before, at this point. Special effects have become so commonplace that I think that most moviegoers are also bored with them now. In fact, the flashiest special effects I've seen in years were in The Fountain, and that was a relatively low-budget movie where the special effects were largely opticals of microscopic fluid dynamics, and shot in whole for about $140k.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298037 - 09/05/2007 10:58
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
I consider a "sequel" to be any movie made after the original in an effort to make more money from the original concept/theme/characters/story.
So, does this mean that I should put US Marshals next to The Fugitive?
Our DVD collection is currently sorted alphabetically by title, except for sequels, which go in order after the original.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298038 - 09/05/2007 11:25
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Roger]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
I consider a "sequel" to be any movie made after the original in an effort to make more money from the original concept/theme/characters/story.
So, does this mean that I should put US Marshals next to The Fugitive?
Mmm.. I haven't seen USM, but from the link you gave it definitely sounds like an intentional sequel to TF.
Cheers
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298039 - 09/05/2007 11:42
Re: Sequelae
[Re: FireFox31]
|
veteran
Registered: 25/04/2000
Posts: 1525
Loc: Arizona
|
Quote:
How do you all rate the sequels to these more time-tested films:
Jaws
The original was absolutely amazing, and had some of the best lines ever ("You're going to need a bigger boat" and "I can't talk to somebody who is lining up to be a hot lunch" or "it ate a car?" as examples). Jaws 2 was pretty good, not quite as good as the original but pretty close. Jaws 3 was bleh for the most part, but some good parts. Jaws 4 was utterly terrible and I had a hard time paying attention through the whole thing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298040 - 09/05/2007 13:55
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Tim]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 30/04/2000
Posts: 3810
|
You mean Jaws 3 in 3D? What were they thinking?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298042 - 09/05/2007 14:44
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Robotic]
|
veteran
Registered: 25/04/2000
Posts: 1525
Loc: Arizona
|
Wow, that just about sums it up. If anybody has had the pleasure of not seeing Jaws 4, I totally recommend you not seeing Jaws 4.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298043 - 10/05/2007 23:38
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Tim]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 19/09/2002
Posts: 2494
Loc: East Coast, USA
|
Crap, I forgot to mention another time tested film:
Superman
That's a no-brainer though, eh? I still don't think I've seen the first installment.
_________________________
- FireFox31 110gig MKIIa (30+80), Eutronix lights, 32 meg stacked RAM, Filener orange gel lens, Greenlights Lit Buttons green set
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298044 - 11/05/2007 00:12
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Dignan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
I consider a "sequel" to be any movie made after the original in an effort to make more money from the original concept/theme/characters/story. So, i would consider "Batman Begins" (never saw it) to be a sequel from a business/money sense.
Well, I guess that's the jaded way to look at it.
I plead guilty. I know that normal folks never have jaded thoughts about the shining city on a hill that is Hollywood, but I just can't shake them. Guilty, guilty, guilty.
Quote:
I prefer the artistic sense. I personally would never consider Batman Begins a sequel. Does that mean you'd consider this to be a sequel to this? I'd say it does according to your definition, but I think the general population wouldn't define it that way.
I would classify that more as a remake. If, after some decent interval, somebody looks back in the body of cinematic and telecast art and decides that they can do a better job with Batman or Gone With the Wind, I have no truck with that. So long as the resurrecting effort doesn't like totally blow chunks.
My initial post was more to assess the case where Producer X makes Film A and it makes some money and then contemplates a follow up, Film B, whether it is a prequel or sequel in the strict sense. And how often do these attempts to mine the vein of opening weekend gold at least roughly equal the original or earlier efforts.
On advice of trusted associates, I never saw the 3rd or 4th entries in the Alien canon, but I hear that some greedly mogul would have done well to let Ellen Ripley go out a winner. Matrix #2 and #3? Anybody see 'em? And come away satisfied?
In well-timed news (George follows this BBS closely I'm told) I hear Lucas is going to make a couple more Star Wars flicks. Sequels? Prequels? I don't want to guess, but would you predict: Super awesome...or...sucko-barfo?
And when is Jerry Bruckheimer gonna get off his ass and remake Moby Dick?
_________________________
Jim
'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298045 - 11/05/2007 00:55
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
Quote:
Matrix #2 and #3? Anybody see 'em? And come away satisfied?
Yes, and emphatically yes. I've never understood people's disdain for the second and third movie. I constantly hear people complaining that they were made "just to get more money", which is contrary to the truth of the matter: The Matrix was pitched, from the beginning, as a trilogy.
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298047 - 11/05/2007 06:35
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
Quote:
Matrix #2 and #3?
There is no Matrix #2 and #3, there was only one Matrix film...
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298049 - 11/05/2007 07:26
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
It is because they were so awful that I like to pretend that they don't exist. The Matrix was such a good film, great ideas, good story, incredible special effects and action. The second and third films might have had the same effects and action, but apart from that they were just crap. I sat there through most of the second and third films bored out of my mind. I came very close to walking out of #3 and I have never walked out of a film in my life. I have the same issue with Pirates of the Caribbean, #1 was so good that I at least expected #2 to be watchable fun. But it wasn't and there is no way that you could convince me to waste my time watching #3. I'm normally quite good at avoiding watching crappy films (I have a mate who just goes to see any old crap), but I so wanted Matrix #3 to be good that I went to see it even knowing how awful #2 had been. Never again... ...and breathe, rant over
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298050 - 11/05/2007 10:29
Re: Sequelae
[Re: andy]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
It is because they were so awful that I like to pretend that they don't exist.
Agreed 100%
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298051 - 11/05/2007 11:59
Re: Sequelae
[Re: mlord]
|
old hand
Registered: 07/01/2005
Posts: 893
Loc: Sector ZZ9pZa
|
I'm not one who needs 'closure' in a movie, and I thought that the open end of the first Matrix was simply perfect. Also with Mark and Andy consider The Matrix to be a movie and do not speak of the other two. A poll may be interesting...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298052 - 11/05/2007 12:10
Re: Sequelae
[Re: sein]
|
old hand
Registered: 07/01/2005
Posts: 893
Loc: Sector ZZ9pZa
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298053 - 11/05/2007 12:21
Re: Sequelae
[Re: sein]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
How about "everyone said the sequels sucked, so I deliberately didn't even see them, in order to preserve my admiration of the first one"? And the same, FWIW, with Foundation books after the third one, and Dune books after the first one. And I wish I'd done the same with the third Gormenghast book.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298054 - 11/05/2007 12:33
Re: Sequelae
[Re: peter]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
Quote:
How about "everyone said the sequels sucked, so I deliberately didn't even see them, in order to preserve my admiration of the first one"? And the same, FWIW, with Foundation books after the third one, and Dune books after the first one. And I wish I'd done the same with the third Gormenghast book.
I'm the same way with the Alien movies. I've seen Alien and Aliens, but stopped there due to the recommendations of several friends.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298055 - 11/05/2007 12:49
Re: Sequelae
[Re: peter]
|
old hand
Registered: 07/01/2005
Posts: 893
Loc: Sector ZZ9pZa
|
True true, that would be smart. Don't think I can edit the poll now anyway.
The strategy wouldn't have worked for me on the Matrix though, I remember going to see the second one on opening night with a bunch of guys from work. Made the mistake of really hyping it up beforehand too. It was a disaster.
Went to see the third to see whether it would make the second make more sense and fill in the new gaping holes in the story. That was another big mistake.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298056 - 11/05/2007 12:56
Re: Sequelae
[Re: sein]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Can I vote for something in-between the first two options? The first was great, and I enjoyed the second two well enough.
As for those of you who skipped the second two Alien movies - oh, how I envy you. The third one was bad, and the fourth one was just shy of Highlander 2 in magnitude of suckiness.
I remember waiting ages for Fox to finally release the special editions of 1 and 2 on their own. For the longest time you could only buy them in the Quadrilogy.
And I definitely agree with an earlier sentiment that the first two Alien movies are equally good in completely different ways.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298057 - 11/05/2007 14:20
Re: Sequelae
[Re: sein]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
I'm really curious: what is it about the second and third films in the Matrix trilogy that everyone didn't like. Beyond the consistent scholarly "they sucked" comments, that is?
I ask because I think there's a lot to talk about there, philosophically, and I'm genuinely confused by the brusque dismissal these films seem to get.
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298058 - 11/05/2007 14:29
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
The main problem is the plotting and the fact that it just feels like the same thing over and over again. I was sat there at one point thinking "oh goody, yet another fight with lots of Agent Smiths". I'm sure there was plenty of other stuff that I didn't enjoy, but I have only seen 2 and 3 once and it is hard to remember even what the "plots" were now. I do remember how badly they sucked though
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298059 - 11/05/2007 14:31
Re: Sequelae
[Re: andy]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
"oh goody, yet another fight with lots of Agent Smiths".
What he said.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298061 - 11/05/2007 15:37
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
what is it about the second and third films in the Matrix trilogy that everyone didn't like
In part, for me, it felt like their reach exceeded their grasp. I think they had a reasonably interesting story to tell, but it was told poorly enough that it didn't work. Part of that, I think, has to do with the exorbitant amount of action sequences. They were neat and all, but they didn't really advance the plot in any way. They kind of got in the way of the story, and, I think, people would start to forget the story while watching an action sequence. So, to sum up, basically bad storytelling.
On top of that, I didn't like the theme of the stories they were telling. The first was a sci-fi movie with some religious overtones. The second two were religious fantasy with sci-fi overtones, and that didn't work for me. The ending was unsatisfying and anticlimactic, to say the least. One of those where you get to the end and you're in disbelief that that was the story they were trying to tell you.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298062 - 11/05/2007 15:41
Re: Sequelae
[Re: drakino]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
I'm the same way with the Alien movies. I've seen Alien and Aliens, but stopped there due to the recommendations of several friends.
Virtually everyone in the world disagrees with me, including the film's director (David Fincher, of Se7en and Fight Club fame), but Alien3 is my second-favorite of the Alien movies, after the original. I think the reason that people dislike it is that it's not just one big alien attack scene after another. It's really a suspense movie, far more like The Thing than Aliens, and I think that's just not what people wanted to see. I can in no way recommend the fourth one, though.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298063 - 11/05/2007 15:52
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
Exactly, that I what I was trying to say, but said it badly.
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298064 - 11/05/2007 15:55
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
Bitt, first of all, thank you for providing the first truly insightful explanation of why you didn't like the movies. That said, I (of course) disagree. I feel that a huge part of the appeal of the story is the process: the fact that the ending is fairly anticlimactic is, to me, a large part of the point. Since so many people connect it to the Christ myth, we'll go with that. Other than the horrific way the character of Christ was put to death (although scores of other people met quite similar fates), what was really "climactic" about his end? Not much. It's the value believers ascribe to his act that's important. And more importantly, it's the process he followed, the journey he took, that's important to those believers. I'm glad the Brothers Wachowski didn't take the Salieri approach and give it a big finish so we would all know they were done. As for the action sequences, I agree up to a point. I think in certain instances those sequences perfectly accomplished their goals. In particular, the "defense of the dock" sequence was, for me, oppressive. Oppressive in that it was at least 20 minutes long, without a moments reprieve. Oppressive in that it was, in all ways, a slaughter. And in that I think the B.W. got it just right: I felt like I was being overpowered, just as the characters in the film were being overpowered. But yeah, I could have done with fewer "Army of Smith" fights. But even that worked for me on some level. It just kept getting more surreal, just as the Matrix did as the system started to break down. Just my 2¥. EDIT: Hit POST too fast. I think it's important to remember that it's no more correct to say that "The Matrix" was "a sci-fi movie with some religious overtones" and the sequels "religious fantasy with sci-fi overtones" than it is to say that "Fellowship of the Ring" was a road-movie and the sequels were war movies. The Matrix was intended from the start as a trilogy, and as such, each part focuses differently.
Edited by webroach (11/05/2007 15:59)
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298065 - 11/05/2007 16:57
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Ok, here's a small list...
X-Men - they all sucked. Big time. I wish I could erase them all from my mind. #3 was a total and utter pile of garbage though, much worse than the first 2 in every respect.
Matrix 2 and 3 - massive stinkers. Story was complete BS, production totally crap compared to the first. Like comparing a master painting to a cheap litho knock-off.
Superman... Only the first 2 originals were any good. The recent one was complete shite.
Batman - 1989 original was good, second was good but not as good. Rest of that 'series' were some of the worst movies ever made. Batman begins was excellent, better than the 1989 Batman.
Blade - first one was quite good, sequels not as good, but 3 better than 2. Blade, IMO, is one of the best cinematic realisations of a Marvel franchise to date. Hell, any comic.
Police Acedmy 2, if I remember correctly, was extremely funny at the time and I ranked it better than the first. Everything else sucked, and number 6 sucked REAL bad.
Pirates of the Caribean - first better than second, but I still enjoyed #2. Just wish they hadn't ended it on a cliffhanger that makes #3 seem like #2 part 2.
Resident Evil - liked both of them equally.
Spiderman... first two were watchable, but not as good as they should have been. I expected more from that franchise. Haven't seen #3 yet, but expect it to be better than the first two.
Liked the 4 primary Alien movies enough, but #1 and 2 were my strongest. I don't have a big enough problem with #3 to rate it below #4.
Predator - liked both equally.
Toy Story - first was definitely better. But neither as good as a number of other Pixar movies - Mosters Inc. and Finding Nemo for example.
Die Hard - probably all the same for me.
Mad Max - #2 was practically in a different series than the first and I prefer it. I also liked Thunderdome but not as much. There is no Mad Max 4 that I've ever heard of (thought someone mentioned that back a page or two).
Fantastic 4 - the sequel has got to be better than the first movie (even though it hasn't been released yet). There was just not much to the first one.
Bourne series - first one was by far better than #2. But not so much because of the story, but Doug Liman's direction. Paul Greengrass (#2 and upcoming #3) is a tool and should be shot for the near unwatchable camera shake he brought to the sequel.
Lethal Weapon - liked them all, but first 2 were the strongest for me.
I don't consider Kevin Smith's Jersey flicks sequels, but rather independent movies that share the same universe. Loved all of them. First Clerks better than the second though (the one true sequel).
Harry Potter - I prefer #1 to #2 but #3 to #1. Not sure how I put #4 in there, but I liked them all quite a bit. It's one of my favorite movie franchises of all time. Disclaimer: I haven't read the books.
The first two Shrek movies were just OK and I can't really say one was better than the other.
Pink Panther 2006 - not technically a sequel, but not quite a remake either. In any case, it doesn't hold a candle to the originals. Kevin Kline absolutely sucked in it. Steve Martin had some good moments, but it wasn't near his best work by a long shot. Beyonce was terrible and should not have been cast in that part at all. I managed to sit through it but was tempted to turn it off a few times.
Fierce Creatures, some would call a sequel to A Fish Called Wanda, but it just had the same actors. Not as good as the original picture anyway.
Indiana Jones - all good, #1 and #3 the best. Really looking forward to a fourth installment, I hope Sean Conery's health is doing well (haven't heard anything about that guy in ages)
The Ewoks movie was almost better than the three new Star Wars prequels. The original trilogy is the true Star Wars saga and as mentioned, I prefer Empire over the other two by a huge margin. I could forget about Ep1-3 completely - though they weren't as bad as the Matrix or X-Men that I want to purge them from reality.
Jaws - there's no competition with the original. Not from its sequels or any other shark-themed movie to date.
Mission Impossible - #1 and then #3. Number 2 was one of those movies that need to be purged.
Charlie's Angels... Umm, is there even a point to ranking these? They all sucked as bad as Police Academy 6.
Chronicles of Riddick was better than Pitch Black (I enjoyed both though)
I'm looking forward to a few sequels that I hope don't let me down: The new Harry Potter movie, next Narnia, Pirates 3, Hellboy 2, new Indy, new Bourne
and not so much looking forward to, but hope they're decent because I'd like to see them: new Die Hard and Shrek 3
And of course one can also hope for sequels: off the top of my head one would be a new Riddick movie taking off from Chronicles.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298066 - 11/05/2007 17:03
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
While the Matrix was originally conceived with the *possibility* of being a trilogy, it wasn't a definite and the first movie did not rely on it in the least. At the time the first movie came out there were also no firm story lines or concepts for the sequels as far as anything I'ev ever read.
Concept and desire don't factor in when the end result is so piss-poor. The movies just seemed like they were developed over a weekend with way too much beer and not enough thought. The stories were just contrived, cliche and annoying. So much possibility existed with the setup of the original. I don't care whether or not the movie was allegorical - it works very well for Narnia. The fact of the matter is that the sequel just weren't good movies. Not as follow ups and certainly not on their own. Blaming the disaster on the finale doesn't give enough credit to the craptastic progression of the second installation.
I remember having watched SW:Ep2 and thinking, damn, I hope the Matrix sequels don't let me down like this. And after watching the second Matrix I hoped (and hoped) that they would rescue the story line in the third movie. Boy was I WRONG. Of course George Lucas came around with a cowpie of a release two years later to solidify my bad 4 year SW/Matrix experiences.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298067 - 11/05/2007 17:08
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
I think it's important to remember that it's no more correct to say that "The Matrix" was "a sci-fi movie with some religious overtones" and the sequels "religious fantasy with sci-fi overtones" than it is to say that "Fellowship of the Ring" was a road-movie and the sequels were war movies. The Matrix was intended from the start as a trilogy, and as such, each part focuses differently.
Just because it's what they intended doesn't mean that they were movies I wanted to watch.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298068 - 11/05/2007 17:23
Re: Sequelae
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
Bourne series - first one was by far better than #2. But not so much because of the story, but Doug Liman's direction. Paul Greengrass (#2 and upcoming #3) is a tool and should be shot for the near unwatchable camera shake he brought to the sequel.
We've talked about this before, but, IIRC, that camera shake you're talking about exists solely in the fight sequences. That camera shake makes them, by far, the most interesting fight scenes I've seen in years. I'm totally bored stiff by traditionally filmed fistfights. It's either an unrealistic depiction of martial artistry or it's a dull two-shot of brawling. I'm totally not interested in the fight. I'm interested in what the fight means to the characters, and that camera shake gave me something that psychologically put me in a similar state to the combatants, not knowing where punches were coming from, being surprised by events, etc. During normal fight sequences, I start thinking about my grocery list and waiting for it to be over. Those fight sequences left me enthralled and excited. Excellent filmmaking.
That said, I do hate arbitrary camera shakiness. It's one of the reasons I couldn't ever watch "NYPD Blue". But when it's used to actually provide something to the story, I think it works.
To put it in a different light, if The Third Man was filmed entirely in dutch angle (I know, you're thinking "it wasn't?"), it would be irritating, but since it's used to convey psychological information to the viewer on an almost subliminal level, it works.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298069 - 11/05/2007 17:48
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
old hand
Registered: 07/01/2005
Posts: 893
Loc: Sector ZZ9pZa
|
Been away for a bit...
Bitt, nice reasons why people don't like the 2nd and 3rd Matrices. Personally, I agree with what you say but also add that they seem so unfinished compared to the first. More and more of the story becomes unexplainable. I remember there are long drawn out scenes which blatantly just feel like filling time. Oh, but I do remember a cool car/bike chase sequence. Apart from that, it lacked the satisfaction that I had after watching the first one.
Bruno, that is an excellent list, I really agree on what you say about the movies that I've seen in there. Well, I liked Toy Story 1 and 2, Shrek and Bourne Supremacy a bit more than you did... but yes, good list.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298070 - 11/05/2007 17:57
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
I didn't feel the shaking during the fight sequeces in Bourne Supremacy worked as well as it did for you, Bitt. I found it more disracting and nausiating than anything else. There was also plenty of shaking during running and driving sequences. Plus many of the shots were far too close to be enjoyable. It did have one hell of a car chase though. One of my favorites of all time.
Back to my small list for a second...
Fogot about Ocean's 11. Like it a LOT. Didn't like Ocean's 12, but I'll watch it again to see if I change my mind (it's happened). It was watchable, but when it was over and I had time to reflect, I really began to dislike it. Almost feeling cheated of the time I spent to watch it and think about it. One can only have hope for number 3, Ocean's 13.
And of course if you can call the Bond Movies "sequels" then the most recent one is one of my favorite of all time. I suppose it's technicallly a "prequel" in Bond's own lifecycle, even though the timeline is shot because it's set in present day. Keeping my fingers crossed they only do original films and don't remake any of the previous titles.
Twin Peaks, Fire Walk with Me - this is also technically a prequel and of a TV show to boot. Not as interesting/cool as the TV show. This one just came to mind because I recently replaced my long-lost cassette versions of the two soundtracks with some high quality digital goodness.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298072 - 11/05/2007 23:06
Re: Sequelae
[Re: webroach]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
IMO, Pitch Black is barely science fiction. It's an action/thriller set "in space". The exact same plot could have happened with a train wreck in the 19th century, in the mountains, surrounded by wolves. Or any of a dozen other settings. That doesn't mean it wasn't an entertaining movie, though.
There has to be something about a movie that depends on the scifi element for me to really think of it as scifi rather than just, I don't know scifi-themed. For some reason, I do make exception to that rule when it's functioning as an allegory or metaphor, rather than just window dressing.
So, that said, my favorite scifi movies would be movies like 12 Monkeys, Brazil, Blade Runner, Code 46, Wild Palms, Children of Men, Pi, Primer, Dark City, Strange Days, Unbreakable, V for Vendetta, Gattaca, eXistenZ, Solaris, New Rose Hotel, Abre Los Ojos, Paycheck, Total Recall, Minority Report, Fahrenheit 451, The Andromeda Strain. Unfortunately, very few movies like this get made. (Note: not all of those movies are my favorites, and I don't even like some of them, as I think they failed, but that's a survey of the type of movie of which I'd like to see more be made.)
Edited by wfaulk (11/05/2007 23:41)
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298073 - 12/05/2007 05:37
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31596
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Pitch Black was totally sci-fi, because it required me to suspend my disbelief on an important plot point: That a species of high-speed, giant, carnivorous, predatory bats could survive for eons on a planet with little to no prey to feed upon, and then pour out of the caves in vast numbers just because of an eclipse, to feed upon a scant handful of humans who were there more or less by accident. Surely some kind of science fiction has to be happening for a species to be able to survive and propogate in those circumstances.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298074 - 14/05/2007 11:48
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
veteran
Registered: 25/04/2000
Posts: 1525
Loc: Arizona
|
Speaking of Gattica... I don't ever remember hearing much about it when it was in theaters or when it hit video. I think I saw it on accident when my roommate rented it or something. Have I successfully blocked enough advertisements (TV, web, etc) to have missed any mention of it or was it really kind of a sleeper movie? I thought it was amazing, personally.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298075 - 14/05/2007 12:27
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Tim]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
No, you're right; no one saw it. Well, other than the "sleeper" part. It appears that it lost a large amount of money.
Edited by wfaulk (14/05/2007 12:29)
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298076 - 14/05/2007 13:27
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
member
Registered: 15/01/2002
Posts: 183
|
'Return of the Killer Tomatoes' was far superior to the original. Though, with the bar set that low it would've been tough not to be.
_________________________
CLS
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298077 - 14/05/2007 15:03
Re: Sequelae
[Re: clsmith]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
It only cost under $5 to see a movie in the US in late 1997? With ticket sales of 2.6M by Dec 31 and gross box office over 12.3M as of march 1998, the numbers just don't quite add up for me.
I'd be very surprised if the budget was also 36M. I can see production being less than half that amount, but I can't guess how much they would have spent on promotion.
Briliant movie BTW - have watched it 4 times and still love it. One of my early DVD purchases.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298078 - 14/05/2007 15:14
Re: Sequelae
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
I saw Spiderman 3 on Saturday, originally intending to see Disturbia. I really wish I'd gone to the right movie theater (my friend mixed up the times/theaters).
That was a terrible movie. Not just because of the dorky evil Peter, either. There were just so many little problems with it that add up to one big mess of a film. Thomas Hayden Church was good, as usual, and Topher Grace made the best of his part (which is to say, not much), but the writing and direction was just terrible across the board. And am I the only person who's been continually dismayed that Tobey Maguire is playing this part?
I spent the dance montage with my hands on front of my face. My friend was so sunken in his seat (out of dismay) he almost fell out. I'm embarrassed that I added to the monster amount of money that crapfest has earned.
Anyway, everyone should do themselves a favor and seek out Waitress or Away from Her this weekend. Your lives will have been richer for it.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298079 - 14/05/2007 15:17
Re: Sequelae
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Yeah, I doubt that Return of the Killer Tomatoes had a budget of $36M, too.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298080 - 14/05/2007 15:20
Re: Sequelae
[Re: Dignan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
FWIW, Disturbia does exactly what you expect pretty well. That is, if you are inclined to see it, you won't be disappointed, but it's clearly not for everyone. Not deep thinking, but fun.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298081 - 14/05/2007 16:13
Re: Sequelae
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Quote:
FWIW, Disturbia does exactly what you expect pretty well. That is, if you are inclined to see it, you won't be disappointed, but it's clearly not for everyone. Not deep thinking, but fun.
That's what I was looking forward to. I'm not expecting a spectacular film, and I'm clearly not expecting anything as good as Rear Window, but it looked entertaining and has actors I like.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#298082 - 14/05/2007 16:18
Re: Sequelae
[Re: hybrid8]
|
member
Registered: 15/01/2002
Posts: 183
|
Quote:
I'd be very surprised if the budget was also 36M.
Maybe all the mid-filming sponsorship deals helped? 
_________________________
CLS
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index