Sequels and Unoriginality

Post by **Chaya** » June 23rd, 2006, 7:39 pm

Okay, I just have to get this off my chest. I HATE SEQUELS. Period.
While not all sequels are bad, in general I think they are a cop out for studios to make a fast buck without putting too much work into a film. The execs think that all that matters is the profit, so instead of taking risks and attempting to be original and innovative, thay end up recycling one of their successful films knowing that the sequel will draw crowds even if the sequel itself is really bad. Half the tripe that is produced in Hollywood (both animated and live action) is nothing more than a stupid sequel. In my opinion, the only time a sequel shoud be made is if the story was originally written as an anthology (ie, LOtR, Harry Potter, SW, some of the comic-book based movies) and not simply because they know a sequel to a successful film would draw the crowds to the theater. As if 'Toy Story 3' didn't sound bad enough, now we have LM3, the stupid "Tinkerbelle/ Fairy' movie, and possibly MInc2 to 'look forward' to. Ugh, talk about unoriginal. And if Disney wasn't bad enough, well then, I think and Dreamwork's Shrek 3 and 'Puss In Boots' serve as the icing on the cake. Somebody shoot me now...
It's not only the sequels that make me cringe, btu the feeble attempt of studios copying one another's films gets old fast. Films such as Ants/Bugs Life, Ratatoulli/ Flushed Away, Nemo/Sharktale, Shrek/ Hoodwinked/ Repunzel (Unbraided?) (fractured fairytales should be banned from now on!!!!) all are produced at the same time. Coincidence? I think not. Grant it, some of the above mentioned movies are VERY good, but it does tend to get a little old after a while.

Where's the originality?

sigh......

Post by **Meg** » June 23rd, 2006, 9:41 pm

You think animated movies aren't orignal? Take a look at all the live-action films out nowadays.

Post by **Chaya** » June 23rd, 2006, 9:58 pm

You think animated movies aren't orignal? Take a look at all the live-action films out nowadays.

Totally agree... I think I mentioned that above. I do have to admit that this summer's animated films have been refreshingly original so far. I LOVE both OTH and Cars! I was simply looking at the lineup for the next few years.... Though KF Panada looks rather interesting

Post by **Meg** » June 23rd, 2006, 10:03 pm

Though KF Panada looks rather interesting

Kung Fu Gecko...

Post by **Josh** » June 23rd, 2006, 10:57 pm

Chaya wrote:As if 'Toy Story 3' didn't sound bad enough... and possibly MInc2 to 'look forward' to.

Did you not like Toy Story 2? I think that's an excellent film, even if it is a sequel.

Post by **Chaya** » June 24th, 2006, 12:40 am

Toy Story 2 was okay, but I still liked the first one better. I have no problem if the sequel is good. I guess it'd the friggin fairies and the Shrek stuff that really bugs me the most

Post by **Christian** » June 24th, 2006, 4:33 am

The original post has a ton of logical errors in it. Lasseter doesn't have 100% control over everything Disney puts out now, especially with most of the stuff (like Fairies) that was in the pipeline before he came on board. Also, we don't know that there really will be a Monsters, Inc. 2 and there may not even be a Toy Story 3. Also, nobody is forcing you to watch any movie you don't want to watch. Also, any movie (original or sequel) can be made well just as any movie (original or sequel) can be made poorly. The fact that a movie is a sequel does not make it a bad movie. The fact that a lot of sequels have been made poorly does not mean every sequel is made poorly. Maybe sequels are made so that a studio can make money but guess what? So are movies that are not sequels. The studios are expecting to make a financial return on them. Welcome to the world where art meets commerce. It is not very original to claim "they are just doing it for the money." Any armchair quarterback can parrot that allegation. Why do we ever have TV series? How come we didn't just have one episode of The Simpsons? You can claim that every episode after that is a sequel and that Fox was doing it "just to make money." I mean, they were all happy at the end of the first episode. Do we really need to know what happens after that? Finally, and I've already sort of hinted at it, you can show your lack of support for sequels by not buying any, seeing any in a theater, and by writing to the studios and telling them to stop, etc. I feel like pointing out more errors in the original post such as where you claim that studios are not taking risks but I don't know of any animation studio that only produces sequels. It seems like they may have some sequels but only in addition to completely original movies as well. Next year DreamWorks has Shrek the Third (a sequel) but it also has Bee Movie (an original movie). Also, even releasing a sequel is taking a risk.

Post by **fani** » June 24th, 2006, 6:19 pm

[quote="Christian"]Also, even releasing a sequel is taking a risk.[/quote]

Yeah, that's true but it's not as much risk as releasing an original movie. Don't you think? Cuz they have at least a certain percentage of "captive" audience from the previous movie. In general though, sequel can either hit or miss like u said Christian. It really depends on how respectful the director is with working the story for the sequel.

Chaya: don't you agree there are some decent sequels? Like the first two Batman movies are good. I agree with Mickey as well with Toy Story 2. I thought that was a strong sequel.

Post by **Meg** » June 24th, 2006, 7:59 pm

The Rescuers Down Under was good.

Post by **PixarVixen** » June 24th, 2006, 8:41 pm

Not all sequels are crap. I think the best ones are An American Tale: Fievel Goes West, The Rescuers Down Under (as Meg mentioned above

), Toy Story 2, and An Extremely Goofy Movie.

~~=oP

Post by **Christian** » June 24th, 2006, 9:22 pm

I hate to say it but this very thread is unoriginal. Nothing has been said here that hasn't been said elsewhere.

Post by **Meg** » June 24th, 2006, 10:34 pm

Very true...

Post by **fani** » June 24th, 2006, 10:38 pm

with that said, why are we even responding to this topic?

Post by **Christian** » June 25th, 2006, 3:29 am

The silence is deafening . . .

Post by **Macaluso** » June 25th, 2006, 11:40 am

PixarVixen wrote:Not all sequels are crap. I think the best ones are An American Tale: Fievel Goes West, The Rescuers Down Under (as Meg mentioned above ), Toy Story 2, and An Extremely Goofy Movie.

~~=oP

The first three are a clear given, and hell, I even think The Rescuers Down Under is BETTER than the original. Australia is awesome.

An Extremely Goofy Movie brings us to the straight-to-DVD sequels. Several have been crap crap crap. Like The Lion King 2 or Kronk's New Groove. But then, there are a few that were actually good. I think, honestly, a big part of it is whether or not they bother to TRY with the animation. Lion King 1 1/2 was fantastic. Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch was done VERY well. There have been some others that my brain isn't thinking about right now.

As long as they TRY with a sequel, I'm fine with it.

Sequels and Unoriginality

Sequels and Unoriginality

Re: Sequels and Unoriginality