Are you fed up of sequels?

[Jaguar007]

The movie I am most awaiting is Bond 23.

[Jezza]

Originally Posted by Jaguar007

The movie I am most awaiting is Bond 23.

So am I. If MGM weren't in so much debt, we'd have it next year. Very annoying.

[Al_The_Strange]

I'll give sequels a chance. In fact, I love them. Sometimes more than the originals...

I love "Terminator 2" better than the first "Terminator"
Love "Aliens" better than "Alien"
"X2: X-Men United" over the first "X-Men"
"Magnum Force" over "Dirty Harry"
"Toy Story 2" over the first.
"Lethal Weapon 2" over the first.

the list goes on...just my tastes though.

[Gabriel360]

Sequels are fine. If Hollywood wants to milk a franchise for all it's worth, go for it. It's not my investment. And if I like the sequels, it's all good.

Remakes are fine. Comparing them to the originals is, at least, something else to talk about.

[Gaius Marius]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

I'll give sequels a chance. In fact, I love them. Sometimes more than the originals...

I love "Terminator 2" better than the first "Terminator"
Love "Aliens" better than "Alien"
"X2: X-Men United" over the first "X-Men"
"Magnum Force" over "Dirty Harry"
"Toy Story 2" over the first.
"Lethal Weapon 2" over the first.

the list goes on...just my tastes though.

The thing with those is that they had a story to tell and weren't just cheap money grabs. I love Aliens, Empire Strikes Back, X2, Dark Knight, etc.... When a sequel has a story to tell, then it is usually good. I just hate the cheap money grab sequels.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Gaius Marius

The thing with those is that they had a story to tell and weren't just cheap money grabs. I love Aliens, Empire Strikes Back, X2, Dark Knight, etc.... When a sequel has a story to tell, then it is usually good. I just hate the cheap money grab sequels.

That is true. I just remembered there are some bad sequels out there. I did find "Iron Man 2" to be weaker than the first. "Lawnmower Man 2" is one of the worst movies of all time. That list could go on as well.

[Blu-ray Fanatic]

Sequels are a hit or miss. I think the franchise with the worst sequels is Saw. Second is Starship Troopers. Third is Star Wars.

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by Diesel

If I like the movie I couldn't care less if it was an original idea, an adaptation (of a comic book, novel, short story, play, a toy, etc.), a reboot, a sequel, a prequel, a spin-off, a re-imagining, a remake...whatever.

Same rules apply if I don't like it

Very well said.

[/thread]

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Master Charles

The Pirates of the Caribbean and Spiderman sequels were awful!

Kill Bill and Kill Bill Vol 2 is an example of a great sequel. When there is more story to tell sequels are great but some sequels coming out, The Hangover and Avatar I think should have been just left alone.

Those two movies could be great but they most likely won't be nearly as good as the first.

They are not sequels, they are all one movie

I like sequels done right, that's all I can say, Captain Obvious I know

[Blu-ray Fanatic]

Originally Posted by Foggy

They are not sequels, they are all one movie

I like sequels done right, that's all I can say, Captain Obvious I know

+1 They follow up with each other

[Cremildo]

Not in the slightest.

I like to revisit IPs I enjoy, and those that do not interest me I ignore.

It couldn't be simpler.

[The Debts]

Given that the Blu-Ray.com's community list crowned Blade Runner 2049 as its favorite film of 2017, I'd say no.

As for me personally, also no. A good movie is a good movie, regardless of where it lands on.

[AaronJ]

Well, I'm not a professional critic, therefore I don't have to go see anything. So if someone makes something that I would absolutely hate, I just avoid. It's like me complaining about something like Country Western music (though I do have some in my iTunes collection -- but it's a small percentage): I don't generally like it, so I don't buy it. It's no skin off my back.

As to something like Sex and the City getting a sequel, OF COURSE it did. The first had a budget of $65M and pulled in over $150M domestic, and $400M+ worldwide. If I were a shareholder in that company, and they DIDN'T make a sequel I would be pissed off. Like seriously making complaints, etc. It would be like if Apple tomorrow just said, "Ahh, heck with it. We're not making iPhones anymore." It's idiotic from a business standpoint. And these studios -- that's what they are: businesses with shareholders to keep happy.

Think of Frozen: Right now I forget who made all the money from that movie, but how pissed would be as a shareholder if they said, "Eh. It's made well over $1B, but we don't really feel like making anymore?" That's, frankly, irresponsibility from a fiscal standpoint.

Now, a lot of the films I watch/buy are either much older films, or indies that aren't going to get a sequel a vast majority of time.

And all this talk about "Was this or that movie necessary?" is just silly. As I've said before, Shoah is probably the only movie I can think of as "necessary." The vast majority of stories that victims told there would never have been heard if it hadn't been made. But something like Sex and the City 2 is neither necessary nor unnecessary -- it's a studio trying (and failing in this case) to do it's job which is make money.


It's the same with remakes as far as I'm concerned. If I'm interested, I'll go see it or buy it. It not, then not. It's not like it changes the fact that the original exists. And if I'm a big fan of that original, I can still pop into the player and watch it anytime I want. How does it matter to me?

[Hazel Motes]

I am. It bums me out that while all the big theatres are playing tentpole franchise films, stuff like The Irishman, The Ballad of Buster Scruggs, Roma, The Meyerowitz Stories etc are getting dumped on Netflix. It's also disappointing from the standpoint that its very rare that a sequel to great film ever lives up to the original. Especially in the past 15 years. It doesn't tarnish the original, it's just a question of, why even bother?

[toddly6666]

There always has been sequels in history of cinema. Some bad, some good. Just the same concept as new movies - some bad, some new.

[toddly6666]

There always has been sequels in history of cinema. Some bad, some good. Just the same concept as new movies - some bad, some new.

[Hazel Motes]

yeah but never this many.

[partridge]

Sometimes the sequel is better than the original because it can get on with its story, not having to worry about introducing the characters.

Sequels are perfectly fine. How likely is it that every film released could be totally original, every time? I don't think it's possible and frankly audiences like to reacquaint themselves with favourite characters. The 25th Bond is on the way and I can't wait

[imsounoriginal]

TBH I tend to prefer sequels over originals, so no, I'm not fed up.

There are certain franchises I'm getting tired of, but I just ignore them. If others wanna enjoy them, who am I to stop them.

[formula_nebula]

I guess I am up for sequel's. I own plenty of them. Some good. Some bad. Depending on the movie, it can be a crap shoot, on whether it turns out good or not.