Remakes are bad but what about...

Discussion in 'General' started by Crystal Plumage, Apr 21, 2005.

  1. Crystal Plumage

    Crystal Plumage Dig me..but don't bury me

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,036
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    The Court of the Crimson King
    ...crappy sequals?
    Just to cash in on the success of the original.
    I just watched the trailer for "Son of the Mask" ,oh boy [​IMG] .
    There was a time where you got a sequal by just adding the word "too" to the original title."Teenwolf Too" springs to mind.
    I just think it's a crap idea.Even worse than remakes.
     
  2. How about sequals to movies that weren't these big giant hits to begin with?
    Whole Ten Yards and Be Cool spring to mind.

    Your example is a sequal to a movie that came TOO late. I think once you pass the 10 year mark, forget the sequal, people might not remember the original. of course there are ALWAYS exceptions.
     
  3. Wait, who said remakes were bad? I for one LOVE a good remake.
     
  4. MrVess

    MrVess Guest

    Actually, the announcement of the "Mask" sequel was initially very welcome. Then came the news of the lack of Carrey and Russell - and the temperature dropped significantly. Then came the names of those involved - and the temperature reached zero. Then came the production stills - and the seas froze.

    And then... there came the film itself. Oh, ye cruel deities that allowed it to happen, there came the film itself - and Ragnarok began.
     
  5. Crystal Plumage

    Crystal Plumage Dig me..but don't bury me

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,036
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    The Court of the Crimson King
    I guess I should've added an IMHO to my post :) .
    And I too love a good remake but alas there aren't any............IMHO :D .
     
  6. maskull

    maskull I finally got an avatar!!! Yay!!

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,659
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Etobicoke, Canada
    I have nothing against sequels, especially if they manage to get a lot of the original cast back together. I don't like the ones where the sequel is a bunch of new, unknown actors.

    I don't know what they were thinking with that new Mask sequel though. seemded untimely and unnecessary.
     
  7. Rock

    Rock Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2000
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Livermore, CA
    But sometimes even the original cast can't help a worthless, unnecessary sequel (POLTERGEIST 2: THE OTHER SIDE).
     
  8. Katatonia

    Katatonia Hellbound Heart

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2003
    Messages:
    21,994
    Likes Received:
    3,398
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Missouri
    I've always liked that sequel. That slimy skeleton thing scared the hell out of me when I was a kid. And that preacher was creepy to the extreme.

    But yeah, there's a lot of really bad sequels out there.
     
  9. Erick H.

    Erick H. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,611
    Likes Received:
    269
    Trophy Points:
    83
    On occassion I actually prefer a sequel to the original(X-MEN 2 comes to mind),but many are just hollow moneymaking schemes.I thought they went to the well once too often with THE RING 2(no pun intended),but in the end,it all comes down to the writing,did they really care about it,was there more to be gained from the story(apart from cash) ?
     
  10. KR~!

    KR~! The Apocalyptic Kid

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2001
    Messages:
    5,466
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    In Hel's Womb
    Most sequels suck, unless the films were suppose to be a series ahead of time.

    There are some good sequels though, but most are crap.

    I too hate most remakes, but I am still looking forward to the new remake of King Kong :p
     
  11. Almost forgot about Anacondas: The Search for the money Orchid...THAT was unnecessary, and as mentioned before, no original cast members.
     
  12. MrVess

    MrVess Guest

    Since "L'arrivee d'un train a la Ciotat", there has been only one followup film that managed to be better than its predecessor. It was in 1980.

    Speaking of the Lumieres' film, Michael Bay has just announced his plans to remake it. Asked about the plot and the screenplay, Bay responded "The what now?", and went on to explain that the remake will take place in New York, that there is serious talk of casting Bruce Willis as the locomotive, and that the new train will be state-of-the-art CGI and will shoot at the waiting passengers, who, in turn, will fire back in slow motion.
     
  13. John Gargo

    John Gargo Guest

    I'm actually pretty big on sequels... even the ones that are obviously inferior to the originals (the afformentioned Poltergeist sequels) I usually find enjoyment in.
     
  14. Tye

    Tye Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    The Midwest
    I'm not a sequel or a remake person. I think I'm more disappointed in sequels, however. Still - it's just a shame to see so many horror films being remade and brought to a "new generation". Give me something original please!
     
  15. Nos4ah2

    Nos4ah2 Guest

    Bad sequel?

    Return of the Jedi.
    The Matrix Reloaded.
    Scream 2, 3, 4, however many they're up to now.
    All of the NOES sequels except for New Nightmare.
    Quite a few F13 sequels
    Quite a few Halloween sequels

    ...IMHO ;)
     
  16. maskull

    maskull I finally got an avatar!!! Yay!!

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,659
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Etobicoke, Canada
    wow, I actually liked most of those sequels. I also liked the first sequel to Poltergeist though i can understand why people didn't. Poltergeist 3 was crap though.

    I have respect for the idea of sequels. sure they're quite often a money grab, a way to cash in on a previous hit movie, but i think it's harder to make a sequel than a remake. with a remake the story, characters, etc are already laid out for you and all you have to do is tweak a few things (except in the case of Psycho: shot for shot :confused: ). with a sequel you still have to come up with a whole new story and sometimes all new characters...now, it doesn't always work, but i think it's harder to make a sequel than and remake. Maybe that makes them more worthy.

    for the record, I actually preferred the sequels to Friday The 13th over the original film. I think horror (especially slasher) is a genre that is tailor made for sequels as there are all these interesting characters that fans of the genre really want to see more of. I personally feel that maybe horror wouldn't be as cool without all the sequels that are made.
     
  17. Nos4ah2

    Nos4ah2 Guest

    I thought F13 the first was really great. Sure it blatantly ripped off Halloween, but it was well done and full of great gore! It also started the camp serial killer trend.
    I also thought that it was pretty atmospheric and paranoia-inducing. I especially like the scene where the door swings open and the guy is pinned to the door with arrows. Great!
    I also liked parts 4 and 6. IIRC, I liked 7, even though it felt like they were really reaching with that one.
    Other than that, I've thought the rest were mostly shite.
    (I remember liking certain parts of JGTH)
     

Share This Page