Guest sharpie Guests Posted October 25, 2011 Posted October 25, 2011 Yeah, the books were great. My kids were really into them as well. The movie wasn't very good and pissed off fans of the book by changing the ending.
RealityChuck Old-Timey Member Posted October 25, 2011 Posted October 25, 2011 Battlefield Earth. Mention of a possible sequel was made during production, and it's clear from the ending that Travolta could have come back as the villain. The fact the the film got some of the worst reviews in human history, and was a flop of impressive magnitude put an end to that pretty quick.
Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket Guests Posted October 25, 2011 Posted October 25, 2011 Sequels have little to do with whether the material it follows is any good, right? In Hollywood anyway every flick is a potential series.
Edgy MD Site Manager Posted October 25, 2011 Author Posted October 25, 2011 Every Sylvester Stallone movie anyhow.But some of them are built as the establishment of a series, with 75% of the content laid out as exposition, and the actors signed to three-picture deals and such. Many of them are even bankrolled with the idea that if they over-invest in the first film, they'll make up for it in the subsequent ones.And that's particularly sad, wasting all your jizz looking to the future, and not caring as much about the bird in hand.
Benjamin Grimm Old-Timey Member Posted October 25, 2011 Posted October 25, 2011 It's probably still a bit early to call this one, but my hunch is that Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief will qualify for this category.
RealityChuck Old-Timey Member Posted October 26, 2011 Posted October 26, 2011 John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:Sequels have little to do with whether the material it follows is any good, right? In Hollywood anyway every flick is a potential series.You're correct about the quality -- sequels are often made from awful films. But the main factor is the profitability. There used to be a fairly reliable formula about how much money a sequel would make, given the box office of the first film. If that number was less than what the film would cost, the sequel wasn't made.I'd say that formula is no longer reliable, but the principle remains the same: if the first film tanks, no one's going to invest in the second in the hope it will do better.
Edgy MD Site Manager Posted October 26, 2011 Author Posted October 26, 2011 I think the formula was that you could count on 60% of the box office of the prior film. But Superman Returns grossed something like $400 million, and yet they pulled the plug on the franchise. You can't make a sequel to that for under $240 million? Who are you? James Cameron?
Fman99 Old-Timey Member Posted October 26, 2011 Posted October 26, 2011 Still mad that Flash Gordon didn't spawn four or five sequels with Brian Blessed, Timothy Dalton, the return of Max Von Sydow and album after album of kickass Queen songs.Perhaps my favorite childhood superhero movie, with all apologies to General Zod and Co.
Edgy MD Site Manager Posted September 10, 2012 Author Posted September 10, 2012 Edgy DC wrote:And that's particularly sad, wasting all your jizz looking to the future, and not caring as much about the bird in hand.What a clumsy pile of mixed metaphor that was. Anyhow, add John Carter of Mars to the roster of failed serials.I'm watching DVDs of an early franchise smash in William Powell and Myrna Loy's The Thin Man. It becomes boringly formulaic early on, but Powell's just great. The only problem is that he spends so much time in each film not wanting to be dragged out of his cocktail-soaked retirement, that right under his nose a missing person case escalates to murder, or a murder escalates to a triple murder, while he and his wife trade insouciant quips. Some detective he is. Part of the job is getting the perp before the bodies pile up, Nick.
Guest Mets � Willets Point Guests Posted September 10, 2012 Posted September 10, 2012 Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events managed to dramatize the first three of thirteen books in the series but it looks like no more will be made (which is good since these books deserve better than a "whacky Jim Carrey vehicle").
Guest The Second Spitter Guests Posted September 10, 2012 Posted September 10, 2012 Unbreakable -quite possibly the only movie that I lament a lack of sequel. And the script for the sequel exists. Shame.
Frayed Knot Old-Timey Member Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 There appears to have been just a single 'Terry and the Pirates' movie done back in 1940, although at Five Hours Long maybe that qualifies for a series all by itself.I know there was talk of doing one about 10 years ago and maybe that would have spawned a franchise but I guess that first one never got off the ground.
Edgy MD Site Manager Posted September 19, 2012 Author Posted September 19, 2012 I'm going to guess that it may add up to five hours but was actually originally released in 15 one-reel 20-minute installments.
Zach Thornton Syracuse Mets - AAA LHP On Sunday, the southpaw tossed five shutout innings as the bulk pitcher. He gave up 2 hits, walked 2 and had 5 strikeouts. Explore Zach Thornton News >
Recommended Posts