Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Best genre for sequels?


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

Comedy sequels usually don't work. All too often the premise is played out.

Horror sequels tend to fail because the shock of the initial is gone.

Romance sequels fall flat because they have to "unresolve" what's already resolved. Ditto for dramas.

In my opinion, action and sci-fi movies are the ones that do the best with sequels.

As a subset, comic book movies are especially well-suited because their fans generally want to see new villains and such.

Am I missing anything here?

(besides sleep)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Lake Ho'z was pretty good. You know, the sequel to Lake House.

In all seriousness, I thought it would be a cool concept to involve a small cast of characters, kinda like the TV show 'Friends' but in more of a movie "Crash' kinda way. Have several movies that span throughout their entire lives and involve all the genres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 little words. "Bond, James Bond!"

007 has endured how many sequels, and how many Bonds, 6? Yes, some have been better than others, ("Goldfinger" still rates as my all time favorite, and "In her Majesties Secret Service" as it's worst.)

Action-Adventure followed closely by Sci-Fi will always win in any remake. (Though Jaws 2-? could have stood not to be made and Jurasic Park 2 they could have left out.)

The first 3 Star Wars, and the Star Trek movies, while not all great when campared to each other, are still worth a watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a comedy sequel can work. I still watch the Austin Powers, Naked Gun, and Pink Panther sequels.

Maybe it's just wishful thinking because I want Hangover 2 to be really good. They were smart to leave a few plotlines to pursue in the sequel, like Heather Graham's enormous jugs...er, relationship with Ed Helms.

I am also very hopeful for Zombieland 2, but this has a higher pSuck (probablility of suck), because it was wrapped up at the end. Problems with comedy sequels are when the movie was resolved at the end of the first and the sequel is just to squeeze some extra bucks out of the franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does a longer wait time mean a better movie? Phantasm had 10 years between episodes and that was a worthy sequel, but I havent seen the 3rd or 4th. I thought that Stallone's revamping of Rambo was decent and Rocky Balboa was very good.

The Die Hard series didnt need the last installment, neither did Indiana Jones. I am very apprehensive about Boondock Saints 2, I dont want it to knock down the pedestall that the 1st sitting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also very hopeful for Zombieland 2, but this has a higher pSuck (probablility of suck), because it was wrapped up at the end. Problems with comedy sequels are when the movie was resolved at the end of the first and the sequel is just to squeeze some extra bucks out of the franchise.

How is it wrapped up? There is still a world full of zombies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it wrapped up? There is still a world full of zombies...

Most Zombie movies end with a world full of zombies. What loose ends were there to explore in a sequel. If the only common tie between one movie and the other is a world full of zombies, and the same cast, it will suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Zombie movies end with a world full of zombies. What loose ends were there to explore in a sequel. If the only common tie between one movie and the other is a world full of zombies, and the same cast, it will suck.

There's a lot they could do with Columbus or Tallahassee since the story of the first was just focused on Little Rock and Wichita.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
    • Reasonable. I mean I didn’t see a clear path to relief this season myself. As I have typed already, I think the QB FA class is more interesting next season and that draft is supposed to be stacked as well. There just weren’t many options this year.  When you have Tepper to contend with you have to tread lightly around this unless you are 100% certain and willIng to stake your job on it.   There were a couple of outings that helped Bryce a lot in terms of  thinking maybe he can do this, and if you are a supporter you are giving them a lot of weight. You are likely to think just get him some more help and he can do that every week. Which I think Tepper falls into that category.  And the playoffs, division champs, regardless of the way I see that, the supporters will also give that a lot of weight.    And the big one, the atmosphere In BOA for that WC game, Tepper had to be soiling himself over that. If you pulled Bryce out right now you had better be right and your new guy had better make the playoffs and look good doing it or you will be gone and your chance to build your old team back into respectability will be gone too.  So here we have Pickett on a one year deal, and Grier and King. I understand it.  
×
×
  • Create New...