Movie Sequels/Remakes
Archived92 replies · 1,505 views
Burt Reynolds wrote: Anyone know what happened to the proposed Indiana Jones sequel?
Hopefully they`ve realised that Ford is too old,and are re-writing the script as a prequel.
The remake that I'm really craving, in all seriousness...is That Darn Cat 
Yeah, yeah, I know there was a "remake" with Christina "I'll Always Look Like I'm 12" Ricci, but that one doesn't count.
:p
steveone wrote: Im not too excited about the forthcoming Rocky Balboa either...
The "Family Guy" episode where Rocky goes to Mars to box pretty much ruins the idea of another Rocky film for me as well 
His Holiness, The Pope wrote: I think Coppola is trying to get a movie version of "On the Road" off the ground.
As in Kerouac's book? hmmm, i'd be interested in that
Johnny wrote:
His Holiness, The Pope wrote: I think Coppola is trying to get a movie version of "On the Road" off the ground.
As in Kerouac's book? hmmm, i'd be interested in that
Apparently, yes.
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote: But wheres Rambo gonna go? Afghanistan again or Iraq?
What about North Korea? Good thing the US has lots of enemies.
steveone wrote: Im not too excited about the forthcoming Rocky Balboa either...
There's a song by Aloud called Rocky 13. Let's hope the movies never make it that far!!
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote:
on the sequal front give me another Back to the future or police Academy.
Another Police Academy?! Isn't their like 12 already?
Another BTTF would be cool, but Michael J is hardly in the condition to play young Marty anymore! Plus i felt the third one was a step down in quality compared to the first two
FrogChorus wrote:
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote:
on the sequal front give me another Back to the future or police Academy.
Another Police Academy?! Isn't their like 12 already?
Another BTTF would be cool, but Michael J is hardly in the condition to play young Marty anymore! Plus i felt the third one was a step down in quality compared to the first two
Actually, I think BTTF2 and 3 both sucked. The first was the only one worth watching.
Shellshocker wrote:
FrogChorus wrote:
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote:
on the sequal front give me another Back to the future or police Academy.
Another Police Academy?! Isn't their like 12 already?
Another BTTF would be cool, but Michael J is hardly in the condition to play young Marty anymore! Plus i felt the third one was a step down in quality compared to the first two
Actually, I think BTTF2 and 3 both sucked. The first was the only one worth watching.
BTTF 3 wasn't too bad, I think, in the overall scheme of things. BTTF 2 was way over-the-top (it's one of those films that you watch with some understanding that a lot of cocaine was snorted during the writing process...a lot of cocaine) 
[brown]Ally[/brown] wrote: As a rule, sequels and remakes are always always shite next to the originals. Recent sequel exceptions would be Batman Begins and Superman Returns but even then I doubt they'll be looked back on as all-time great movies. Superman Returns was about half an hour too long as well.
The Godfather is usually the proof that sequels can work...
Sequels aside, can anyone name a remake that was truly better than the original effort?
It usually works only if you have not seen the original, and that is the point.
I'd like to see Hollywood come up with some new ideas instead of rehashing old franchises for a quick buck. There's fcuk all originality left in the "big" movie business, just calculating money-making bastards like Joel Schumacher scamming parents out of cash.
This will never happen as long as they keep using focus group and throw us happy endings. I watched the movie "Benchwarmers" yesterday... seriously, who's the nutjob who actually paid to get this done?
For me, my perfect sequel will be coming up soon.. it's Indiana Jones 4... I've been waiting for too long for this...
I think it's too easy for anyone with some money to make a movie. Before it was difficult so there were less crap movies. Now......
JHC
68Pontiac wrote: I think it's too easy for anyone with some money to make a movie. Before it was difficult so there were less crap movies. Now......
JHC
Depends of your definition of a movie.
Most people watch movie to entertain them and get away from their life for 90 minutes with packed actions.
It's not bad, nothing bad at liking an action packed movie.
Then there is the other kind of movie where you have to think through the movie and then think when the movie is finished, like a David Lynch movie... not really the type of movie you watch after getting back from work and having your kids put in bed so you can relax...
How many genuine good movie that you enjoy do you actually see each year? I must see around 50 to 60 movies per year, probably more, I believe I must actually really enjoy probably 4 or 5 in a whole year, find 30 good, and the rest are mostly fillers...
Example, this week-end, I saw "RV" with Robin Williams, Benchwarmers with Rob Schneider and "Inside Man" with Denzel, Clive Owen and Jodie Foster.
RV is the type of movie probably done 200 times, especially by Chevy Chase, there is this joke happening about 10 times in the movie that kept me laughing for no reason... to be honest, I needed to cheer up that day after having bad news that day, it did its job, but overall, week family entertainement, do only rent if you don't have a choice to rent a movie good for a whole family.
Then you have Benchwarmers... 90 minutes of my life I will never get back, I have to get why Adam Sandler keeps producting movies like this, I guess it's because it's appealing to the kids. I think I will never rent a Rob Schneider movie again, that settles it for me, I was dragged into Deuce Bigalow European Gigolo by friends of my wife, I'm done.
And then you have inside man, a psychologic thriller.. you think it's your typical bank robing movie, but it goes further than this... although it's not 100% original, this movie was done with great actors giving good performances.. it was good, but not great... makes you think a little, and once its over, you're glad you saw it, but it has flaws because it's not 100% typical straightforward, so you have to adapt to it.
Of course I was expecting something bad with Benchwarmers, but I needed some comedy that day... but sometimes it's like the same movie is done again and again...
His Holiness, The Pope wrote: I think Coppola is trying to get a movie version of "On the Road" off the ground.
No offence, but yuck!
I don't think any filmmaker needs to make an onscreen version of Kerouac's book.
Well, I despise most modern Hollywood films anyways...
Until I was walking back from the pub last night I had no idea that they've remade The Wicker Man. Hollywood must die.
Smarra[gold]dona wrote: supposedly the "new" warriors film will be set in L.A. and the only thing connecting this to the classic film is the name warriors of the gang
here is a link to pictures of the Original cast taken at a recent screening of the original film
Thanks for the link. Great pictures.:)
Smarra[gold]dona wrote: supposedly the "new" warriors film will be set in L.A. and the only thing connecting this to the classic film is the name warriors of the gang
here is a link to pictures of the Original cast taken at a recent screening of the original film
Not one pic of Ajax or Swan?
Taboo # 7 wrote:
Shellshocker wrote:
FrogChorus wrote:
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote:
on the sequal front give me another Back to the future or police Academy.
Another Police Academy?! Isn't their like 12 already?
Another BTTF would be cool, but Michael J is hardly in the condition to play young Marty anymore! Plus i felt the third one was a step down in quality compared to the first two
Actually, I think BTTF2 and 3 both sucked. The first was the only one worth watching.
BTTF 3 wasn't too bad, I think, in the overall scheme of things. BTTF 2 was way over-the-top (it's one of those films that you watch with some understanding that a lot of cocaine was snorted during the writing process...a lot of cocaine)
I agree with you in that BBTF3 was better than BTTF2. Still only maybe a 6 out of 10.
not usually up for re-makes or sequels but alien-aliens was cool in its day,then it nosedived somewhat. always fancied a remake of "the day the earth stood still" but in the current political climate i cant see that happening any time soon.:(
BTTF>BTTF 2>BTTF 3
Saying the third one is better than the second one is as bad as saying that Temple of Doom is better than The Last Crusade and Raiders Of The Lost Ark! :D
I think Spider-Man 2 went above and beyond the first one, if only because you got the whole messy "origin" story out of the way and could show that when the credits roll, there's still the situation of a young man cursed or blessed with extraordinary powers and forced to live with it somehow. Kinda like me :p
Has anyone seen the Demi Moore version of The Scarlet Letter, by chance? I saw that in a class one time, and it totally does a number on the novel. There's even a standard action-movie style ending. So it just goes to show that Hollywood doesn't necessarily have to ruin an old movie, it can also ruin an old piece of literature just fine if you give it a chance.
Oh, and while technically not a "sequel" so much as a continuation....I have to cite my old chestnut The Empire Strikes Back. Vader is the ultimate badass in that one, and it's totally the antithesis of the kid-friendly predecessor
FrogChorus wrote: BTTF>BTTF 2>BTTF 3
Saying the third one is better than the second one is as bad as saying that Temple of Doom is better than The Last Crusade and Raiders Of The Lost Ark! :D
I don't think Temple of Doom is anyone's favorite Indy Jones flick 
(not the sensible people, anyway).
The second BTTF was just too much, I think. It was the first one to be set "in the future", and boy if they didn't reinforce it every twenty seconds with some outlandish "futuristic" touch. The third one took a step back and went into the old West (or a Disneyfied version; we're talking Michael J. Fox, not Sergio Leone) and was forced to be a little less outlandish (though there's still some fucked-up things in that, like ole Doc Brown getting some). You can definitely see the decline in coke consumption per scene, I think :D
Taboo # 7 wrote: I think Spider-Man 2 went above and beyond the first one, if only because you got the whole messy "origin" story out of the way and could show that when the credits roll, there's still the situation of a young man cursed or blessed with extraordinary powers and forced to live with it somehow. Kinda like me :p
Spiderman and Spiderman 2 were so boring its untrue!, i saw them both on DVD today for £3, even at that price i wouldn't punish myself
And on the BTTF topic BTTF 3 kicks arse, only because Mad Dog Tannen is funny as fuck,my only complaint is michael J Fox seems to shout his whole way through the film which is a little off putting but Christopher Lloyd is briliant in it..so alls good.
This blue-eyed boy that wants to be wrote:
BillONdollar wrote: What film would you like to see a sequel to or remade?
would really like to see new generations of 'THE OUTSIDERS'
I read that was supposed to happen a few years ago, with Francis Ford Coppola trying to assemble a new cast of young actors. I'm hoping that didn't fall through; the original is a good movie - youth movie or otherwise.
hell no! there's only one ponyboy: c. thomas howell. 
damn, he was gorgeous.
battlefield earth II, anyone?
