|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Sequels
17/09/2003 02:11 GMT
|
|
|
Why do they make Sequels of Bad movies? Can anyone remeber a good Sequel to a bad movie? if so please tell me, I am sure there are exceptions, but I can not think of one at the moment.
|
|
|
|
zaphod
Posts: 121
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
17/09/2003 09:17 GMT
|
|
|
Tremors II & III
all bad movies, but so bad they are good
Never settle with words when a flamethrower is so much more fun ... |
|
|
|
bavo82
Posts: 0
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
18/09/2003 08:55 GMT
|
|
|
film companies generally green light sequels as a means of revenue raising. In the horror genre they have almost become financing whores for larger projects. Films like Tremors have substancial cult followings and it makes good financial sense to green light a low budget film that might make a little money for a bigger budget project. |
|
|
|
DrFrag
Posts: 0
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
19/09/2003 21:15 GMT
|
|
|
I can only think of five superior sequels (Aliens, Terminator 2, Godfather 2, Wayne's World 2 and Austin Powers 2) and I wouldn't say any of their prequels were bad.
Fright Night 2 maybe? Not that it was a huge improvement, I just loved that bug-eating vampire.  |
|
|
|
DrFrag
Posts: 0
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
19/09/2003 21:24 GMT
|
|
|
Here's some good reading:
http://www.epinions.com/content_2003738756
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/guides/guide-display/-/271JIEJZY2CM5/ref%3Dcm%5Fbg%5Flm/104-2966931-3644727
http://www.eonline.com/Features/Topten/Worstsequels/ |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
23/09/2003 13:57 GMT
|
|
|
There are worst sequels then "Phantom Menace", or is it when you compare it to the original?
|
|
|
|
Tareth
Posts: 191
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
24/09/2003 09:32 GMT
|
|
|
Personally, if you want crappy sequels to crappy movies, you cant go past Evil Dead. The original movie was bad. The sequel Evil Dead 2 was even worse and the final Evil Dead: The Army of Darkness - well, they knew they were onto a bad thing but kept going and made it a comedy. Now look at them, cult movies and very funny - cant wait for the musical that's supposed to be in the works.
Also, a friend of mine has a crappy 80's rip off of a crappy 70's B grade movie, does that count as a sequel - cause that was funny too. |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
26/09/2003 13:24 GMT
|
|
|
hey do not knock army of darkness. it is a great movie. I saw it and did not know it was Evil dead part three, I though it was a stand alone movie. the evil dead trilogy is strange they go from b grade horror to special effect horror to midevil comedy horror. |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
27/09/2003 15:11 GMT
|
|
|
I just saw Tomb Raider II, What a remarkable film, it had everything a you would expect from the guy who gave us speed II |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
16/10/2003 04:13 GMT
|
|
|
I have the ultimate sequel, why make one sequal for one film, when you can make one sequal for two franchises. eg Freddy Vs Jason. If the have the line lets get ready to rumble (or some wise craking rip off), then they have gone to far.
Does the winner take on lets say Michael Myers. |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: Sequels
16/10/2003 04:15 GMT
|
|
|
Also I just read somewhere they are making Dracula 3000, this might be after the great success of Dracula 2000. Can anybody tell me where is Frankenstien 2003, ar there abouts. |
|
|
|
|