What movie franchises have been ruined for you?

[Andrew NDB]

http://www.capitalberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Humans-Burned-Down-Madagascar-Forests-for-Grazing.jpg

I was going to reply to sdp in a different thread and then I realized... come to think of it, huh... it's been a pretty damn depressing few years with major franchises that I once enjoyed...

"Alien"? Utterly destroyed by its creator with the one-two punch of Prometheus and Covenant.

"Star Trek"? STD was insult to injury, salt on an already gaping wound after suffering through the Abrams movies. I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel unless the Tarantino movie turns out to be something truly amazing.

"Star Wars"? Do I even need to elaborate why?

"Terminator"? Not one but two increasingly bad trilogy starting movies, how can anyone possibly still be aboard? I'm not. T6 has an uphill battle. They better cut like the best freaking trailer ever in the history of movie trailers.

"The DCEU"? "Justice League" managed to murder, like, any interest I could have in any subsequent DC movies attached to it all in one fell swoop, as well as retroactively the movies they've already done.

I'm really worried about "The Predator."

Am I missing any here?

[Krutch]

All of the above.

...and Bring It On.

[Spike Spiegel]

Am I missing any here?

https://img.cinemablend.com/cb/1/8/3/b/2/d/183b2de2d81a32d490ce8b2c2e47df1eead79b2d8f88965c71 ebf72766fe0a25.jpg

[CyberCubed]

The thing about movie sequels is you can easily ignore them, and there have always been bad movie sequels, so why are people acting like this is new? Let's look at old movie franchise sequel failures from the 80's and 90's:

1. Did Batman and Robin sucking somehow ruin Batman 1989 or Batman Returns? No. Some people just acknowledge the Tim Burton films and ignore the last two.

2. Did Superman III and IV sucking somehow ruin Superman 1 and 2? No, people, generally ignore the Superman films after the two Donner flicks.

3. Robocop 3 was garbage. Did that that ruin the franchise? No, you can ignore it.

4. Alien III and Ressurection were both pretty bad, yet people ignore them and love Alien and Aliens.

etc.

I mean I could go on, almost any old movie franchise that had a number of sequels always has a bad movie in there. So why are people acting like this is some new thing the late 2000's did? When they have old bad movie sequels, people just ignore them.

[Krutch]

When they have old bad movie sequels, people just ignore them.I agree with you for the most part. I think the bigger issue is when a sequel/prequel comes out that retroactively changes a character or story.

[Spike Spiegel]

2. Did Superman III and IV sucking somehow ruin Superman 1 and 2? No, people, generally ignore the Superman films after the two Donner flicks.



Az6fpD4-lk4

I still like III as a guilty pleasure, I guess. It also has some great character moments.

It'll be interesting to see how the recent controversies with Kevin Spacey will affect the way Superman Returns is remembered from now on.

[plastroncafe]

I don't know that there's a franchise that's been ruined for me because of a singular movie.

I mean, I didn't like Iron-Man 2, but that doesn't ruin my love of the other two.
Benefits of also being a fangirl, I guess.

[Krutch]

I still like III as a guilty pleasure, I guess. It also has some great character moments.

It'll be interesting to see how the recent controversies with Kevin Spacey will affect the way Superman Returns is remembered from now on.

You're right. Superman III, for all it's issues, had some strong moments. I love how unsettling this scene is. And his bright suit amidst the muted tones of the home, the sounds of the kids outside... the director (at times) knew what he was doing.

MYj-L8n75IU

As far as Superman Returns go, if it's being remembered at all I'd say that's an improvement.

And I say that as a really big fan of that movie.

[sdp]

I agree completely with the list and can only add one more:

The Matrix - The second movie was ok but the third was so bland and none of the things set up in the second movie had satisfying answers that it actually made the second movie bad an forget about the original. Now I re-watched the trilogy a while ago and the first is still good and a decent reboot ignoring the sequels and a fresh concept might save the franchise but unless handled very well which I find difficult I think this one is done as well when they eventually try again.

Other examples I'm just not that attached to so I really don't care if say Beethoven or Air Bud were ruined by countless direct to video sequels.

Maybe also The Crow?

The sequels all ruined the idea of the franchise continuing over and over again, also I don't see the development hell ridden reboot being anything to care about. Though it's possible I guess.

When they have old bad movie sequels, people just ignore them.

It's not that easy, while you can do it sometimes others you can't, some sequels can be so bad and change so many things that they retroactively make the original film worse.

[Autbot_Benz]

Inb4 Vegita-San goes on his anti-SJW-Anti_woman MRA star wars rant in this thread for the billionth time on this forum. :lol:

[Vegita-San]

Star Trek.

Ghostbusters.

Star Wars.

Ninja Turtles.

Nothing has been left that hasn't been ruined by the 'nu' audience touch. so long long time dedicated fans. we don't needs you anymores..

God damnit ... I didn't beat crazy old man aut bot to the punch.

[Andrew NDB]

Ghostbusters.

Of course, how could I forget Ghostbusters?

Ninja Turtles.

Ehh... maybe, but it wasn't like the 3 sequels before the PD movies came along really elevated TMNT all that much as a movie franchise to begin with.

[Cure]

It's not that easy, while you can do it sometimes others you can't, some sequels can be so bad and change so many things that they retroactively make the original film worse.

That's retarded. Anyone who thinks that way has issues.

[Andrew NDB]

That's retarded. Anyone who thinks that way has issues.

I dunno. If we get 20 more episodes of Star Wars that are all crappy, in 20 years will anyone really still care about "but part 4 was really good! That was the good one!" There is definitely a diminishing effect.

[plastroncafe]

That's retarded. Anyone who thinks that way has issues.

Yeah, I can't say as I disagree.
Next Mutation didn't work for me, but it's not like it's mere existence has rendered me incapable of enjoying the Mirage books.

What a fragile mindset.

Though...certain works of fiction have been ruined for me by the behavior of the people who've created it...so maybe this is like that?

[ZariusTwo]

It's funny, I consider many of the Marvel movies overhyped but I feel, along with a couple of niche lines, they're the only things preventing me from completely writing off the Marvel brand as a whole. The comics and cartoons outright suck and many of the creators are assholes, the movies at least have a good grip on the characters.

[newfan]

I've been disappointed with some sequels, some getting worse each time but the bad Robocop sequels would not stop me going off to see another attempt at it. I still went to see the last Terminator, Arnie is getting on a bit now so not sure about my level of excitement for 6 but curious enough to see it, still like ones I like (As with other things)

I'm feeling like I'm getting Star Wars'd out a bit... I'll see the next one in this trilogy but with less enthusiasm with all the old characters being gone.

[CyberCubed]

When people disliked the Star Wars prequels did that make them hate the original trilogy? No, because you can ignore movie sequels/prequels/continuations if you want.

I think you guys are treating this like you do seasons in a TV show. When a TV show has a bad season it's harder to "ignore" like a movie sequel, because TV shows all continue for a set number of seasons till they end. But with bad movie sequels you can just skip/ignore them.

[plastroncafe]

Harder, but not impossible.
I mean, season 2 of Veronica Mars is clearly the weakest season but that doesn't negate the awesome of Season 3 or the perfection of Season 1.

The same can be said of Friday Night Lights.

[newfan]

When people disliked the Star Wars prequels did that make them hate the original trilogy? No, because you can ignore movie sequels/prequels/continuations if you want.


Yeah, I wouldn't say there are things that are ruined for me, just maybe getting fatigue, even then that's only a few things, otherwise I like to get more of something I have enjoyed.

[Andrew NDB]

maybe fatigue in some cases, that's different.

Maybe that's a better way to put it.

[Coola Yagami]

The thing about movie sequels is you can easily ignore them, and there have always been bad movie sequels, so why are people acting like this is new? Let's look at old movie franchise sequel failures from the 80's and 90's:

1. Did Batman and Robin sucking somehow ruin Batman 1989 or Batman Returns? No. Some people just acknowledge the Tim Burton films and ignore the last two.

2. Did Superman III and IV sucking somehow ruin Superman 1 and 2? No, people, generally ignore the Superman films after the two Donner flicks.

3. Robocop 3 was garbage. Did that that ruin the franchise? No, you can ignore it.

4. Alien III and Ressurection were both pretty bad, yet people ignore them and love Alien and Aliens.

etc.

I mean I could go on, almost any old movie franchise that had a number of sequels always has a bad movie in there. So why are people acting like this is some new thing the late 2000's did? When they have old bad movie sequels, people just ignore them.

1 Really now? Where's Batman Triumphant?
2 That's hard to say, after 5 movies, good or bad it might have time for Reeves to do other novies
3 So.... why did it die there? Where's part 4?
4 people can argue we didn't need a part 4.

Movie franchises get ruined when the one movie so bad it either dies or get rebooted.

[Cure]

You're missing his point completely.

[ranger_scout]

The Chronicles of Narnia was ruined with both Prince Caspian and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I thought The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was a faithful adaptation and probably was my favorite film of 2005. Its sequels were just major letdowns. They are apparently going to make The Silver Chair, but I am worried they might not get that one right either.

Wonder Woman has so far been the only bright spot in the D.C. Extended Universe. I just can't get into any of the other films.

[Sumac]

None.
As strange as it sounds I am always open to give a chance to any franchise, no matter, how bad the previous outing was.

Of course, I do not watch movies in cinema, so I don't pay for them.

[sdp]

Well the thread was not specific enough that it's lead to a few similar yet different discussions.

Yeah, most can ignore crap sequels that are on DTV or crap reboots of cool franchises or whatever as in the case of say Batman. But I think Andrew meant a movie franchise that has had miss after miss that you just can't get excited about a new movie in that genre or that the sequels have messed up the continuity so much that even if a decent movie was made enough of the original ideas have been altered so much that you have no interest in.

That's retarded. Anyone who thinks that way has issues.

I don't disagree, I always hated people who say even the original is ruined or how Star Wars prequels ruined Star Wars. But with Disney Star Wars I kind of understand, I'm just not into the universe anymore and there's no end to it.

What I meant by my post was mostly referring to The Matrix Reloaded, in itself when I re-watched it, it's not a horrible movie, it has enough there to make it a disappointing but alright sequel that lead into the next movie with a bunch of questions. Now Revolutions went for a generic war movie and answered or gave unsatisfying answers to Reloaded, making that movie worse off since now you know all those interesting things that could be expanded were really just crap. It lead to such a bad taste in my mouth I didn't watch The Matrix which was my favorite movie at the time for many many years.

When I re-watched it, I had a great time and was able to "separate" it from the sequels but sometimes it happens.

I was definitely not meaning to be one of those "MY CHILDHOOD IS RUINED" people, I've always and will continue to find it dumb.

Next Mutation didn't work for me, but it's not like it's mere existence has rendered me incapable of enjoying the Mirage books.

What a fragile mindset.


No, that's entirely different, Next Mutation is a different continuity. Imagine more along the likes of Mirage TMNT introducing slapstick comedy like TNM in the canon books. Or like you said in Star Wars Han Solo's defining moment ruined.


Though...certain works of fiction have been ruined for me by the behavior of the people who've created it...so maybe this is like that?

Now, that is dumb, you have to separate the art from the artist. You think half of the shows you watch aren't made by jerks? You just don't know.

I mean yeah, sometimes it can affect, it happens but really if we're picky I realized I wouldn't like anything I like.

[Andrew NDB]

Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions (for the record, I actually way more like Revolutions over Reloaded... nothing even happens in Reloaded other than them looking for the Key Master or whatever for 90% of the movie, and he doesn't even end up serving much of a purpose), I find it's much better to imagine them as a single sequel or story broken up into two parts. It isn't hard to imagine a reedit that chops out a little more than an hour of fluff from both movies (way moreso from Reloaded) and combines it all into one movie that would actually be pretty good.

[Shark_Blade]

http://www.capitalberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Humans-Burned-Down-Madagascar-Forests-for-Grazing.jpg

I was going to reply to sdp in a different thread and then I realized... come to think of it, huh... it's been a pretty damn depressing few years with major franchises that I once enjoyed...

"Alien"? Utterly destroyed by its creator with the one-two punch of Prometheus and Covenant.

"Star Trek"? STD was insult to injury, salt on an already gaping wound after suffering through the Abrams movies. I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel unless the Tarantino movie turns out to be something truly amazing.

"Star Wars"? Do I even need to elaborate why?

"Terminator"? Not one but two increasingly bad trilogy starting movies, how can anyone possibly still be aboard? I'm not. T6 has an uphill battle. They better cut like the best freaking trailer ever in the history of movie trailers.

"The DCEU"? "Justice League" managed to murder, like, any interest I could have in any subsequent DC movies attached to it all in one fell swoop, as well as retroactively the movies they've already done.

I'm really worried about "The Predator."

Am I missing any here?

1. I actually enjoy Prometheus. Never seen the other Aliens movie yet though.

2. I'm only familiar with the Star Trek reboot movies. The first one was forgettable with Chris Pine being a typical ****boy and that one scene where the woman suddenly strip her whole outfit off was so random like wtf. The sequel with Benedict Cumberbatch was a bit better.

3. Star Wars... yeah, there's no main villain threat like Supreme Leader Snook being killed off so prematurely. Also, Rose being a lame cockblock just threw away the Finn X Poe ship set out in TFA... Lame!

4. Terminator I only enjoy the first two. It gets boring after that.

5. DCEU. Justice League was awful after what WB & Whedon did.

[Sumac]

Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions (for the record, I actually way more like Revolutions over Reloaded... nothing even happens in Reloaded other than them looking for the Key Master or whatever for 90% of the movie, and he doesn't even end up serving much of a purpose), I find it's much better to imagine them as a single sequel or story broken up into two parts. It isn't hard to imagine a reedit that chops out a little more than an hour of fluff from both movies (way moreso from Reloaded) and combines it all into one movie that would actually be pretty good.
Yeah, I like Revolutions more than Reloaded too.

Part of the problem with Reloaded that it has a very ****ed up pacing, especially closer to the end. Parts of the story from Reloaded were cut from the movie and told in the game tie-in Enter the Matrix and two shorts from Animatrix. One covers how Resistance have learnt about attack of machines and another tells about origin of this annoying teenager who fanboys Neo.

The funny part that even if you play Enter the Matrix before Reloaded (like I did), you still won't get a full picture, because ETM, also, misses some story beats, which were left in the movie.

Revolutions, gladly was spared from this problems, and aside from the fact that it pick ups immediately after Reloaded with no explanation about what had happened in the previous movie, it is much more coherent and fun (given that you like Matrix mythology).

It kind of reminds me about Quantum of Solace, which picks up immediately after end of Casino Royale. Though, in this case it was not planned this way I believe.

[Shark_Blade]

I also prefer the first Matrix. The sequels are just meh.

[Cure]

Everyone prefers the first Matrix.

[Sumac]

I also prefer the first Matrix. The sequels are just meh.
I treat Matrix and its sequels, like a very different things. Though I like them all more or less the same.
My main problem with sequels, aside from aforementioned problems with pacing in the Reloaded, is that all main characters in them talk in pseudo-philosophical babble. Hilariously secondary characters talk like normal people.

[Andrew NDB]

More than anything else, though, I think Matrix 2 and 3 show the hazards of rushing out sequels or worrying about "we need to make a trilogy... quickly!" The Wachowskis had a lifetime to devise Matrix 1 and it shows. They spent only like a year or so developing Matrix 2 and 3 (which they shot back to back, to boot)... and it also shows. They should have spent 5 years working on nothing but a strong Matrix 2 and the same for 3.

[oldmanwinters]

Az6fpD4-lk4

I still like III as a guilty pleasure, I guess. It also has some great character moments.

It'll be interesting to see how the recent controversies with Kevin Spacey will affect the way Superman Returns is remembered from now on.

Oh, man, I love Superman III for Richard Pryor stealing the spotlight in every scene he's in.

[Andrew NDB]

I LOVE Richard Pryor... but man, in Superman 3... eh, yeah. Bad movie. Superman IV was a stronger movie with a noticeably smaller budget. It's sort of the TMNT III to Superman III's TMNT II.

[oldmanwinters]

I LOVE Richard Pryor... but man, in Superman 3... eh, yeah. Bad movie. Superman IV was a stronger movie with a noticeably smaller budget. It's sort of the TMNT III to Superman III's TMNT II.

I'll confess it's not a good "Superman" movie. Kinda feels more like a sitcom-based feature film with Superman as the guest star.

[Andrew NDB]

I'll confess it's not a good "Superman" movie. Kinda feels more like a sitcom-based feature film with Superman as the guest star.

It was like they transferred the buffoonery of Luthor and his cronies in I and II onto the whole movie in III and just said, "F*** it."

[Vegita-San]

some parts arn't bad. an average man saving superman. evil superman versus clark kent. clarks normal life.

other parts are. basically a richard pryor movie.

[AT-Man]

In my understanding a franchise goes bad when you don't want to see it continue anymore. In that case Terminator has been ruined since T3, even though Genisys was a surprisingly fun parody. Predator might be on its way to ruination, but I'll give the new one the benefit of the doubt.

[plastroncafe]

Maybe it's my understanding of the word franchise. I was taking it to mean the entire property itself, and not a specific spinoff of that property.

Are we talking about it as just a singular iteration?

Like, that McDonald's on Main Street is terrible I won't visit that franchise again? Meaning that particular store, as opposed to McDonald's and its entirety?

[Leonardo_thebest]

Superman III is better than TMNT 3.
Both are better than MOS, BVS, and Justice League and Bayturtles 1&2

Nah, just kidding. TMNT3 just blows. Superman III is gold.

Bayturtles killed my desire for more turtle films. And with Ready Player One.... yeah, double damage.

Likewise, I'm done with Superman and Batman. Aquaman will be dead soon.
I'm all nostalgiaed out. Time for fresh stuff, like, give me a Saga film, or Atomic Axe, or Squarriors!

http://squarriors.com/

New blood! but not Liefields Newblood. Youngblood? Blood pouch? Badly-drawn feet-man?
Tits to the side starvation girl. Rippedoff wolverine with a twist guy.

[Andrew NDB]

even though Genisys was a surprisingly fun parody.

I've never heard Genisys described that way. I don't think it's that far off the mark.

Shame on them for lowballing T5 with PG-13 when T4 tried the same thing and failed, though.

Like, that McDonald's on Main Street is terrible I won't visit that franchise again? Meaning that particular store, as opposed to McDonald's and its entirety?

Plenty of people have a bad experience at Burger King, or a Pizza Hut, or a Red Robin and swear off the franchise. Often times it doesn't last, but it's definitely a thing. "I'm never going to a Red Robin ever again after I found that hair in my damn burger!"/"... after that waitress was so rude to me!"/"... after I had to wait 50 minutes for my food!"

I mean, it makes sense. Even if you don't visit that Red Robin ever again, if you visit another one some part of that money you spend is going to end up in the franchise fee monies going to the same Mr. Red Robin at the top.

[Vegita-San]

The Star Wars Sequel trilogy really HAS ruined the originals.

All the struggle, all the dying all the anguish and the joy at the end is completely squashed now. you know it pretty much means nothing.

[Sumac]

In my understanding a franchise goes bad when you don't want to see it continue anymore. In that case Terminator has been ruined since T3, even though Genisys was a surprisingly fun parody. Predator might be on its way to ruination, but I'll give the new one the benefit of the doubt.
I think from certain point of view Predator is beyond being ruined - AVP, AVP2, Predators. Some even consider Predator 2 being a bad movie.

The Star Wars Sequel trilogy really HAS ruined the originals.

All the struggle, all the dying all the anguish and the joy at the end is completely squashed now. you know it pretty much means nothing.
Some people find it "meaningful deconstruction of the OT themes and that it is suppose to reflect real world". Well, those people can eat some ****. If they have ruined their own lives and become losers it doesn't mean that SW should reflect it. :P

[Andrew NDB]

I think from certain point of view Predator is beyond being ruined - AVP, AVP2, Predators.

I think people are able to mentally compartmentalize the two AVP movies into their own private island of suck... but they certainly didn't help at all.

"Predators" is a shame. I enjoyed it quite a lot, but #1, it had way too many forced callbacks to the original movie, many of the characters saying the same lines just because of nostalgia. Very annoying. #2, it's missing anything in the way of a satisfying ending. There should have been extra oomph there. It'd be like if Aliens had stopped with Ripley getting aboard that dropship on top of the building, and we never had the Queen battle on the Sulaco.

Some even consider Predator 2 being a bad movie.

It didn't really move the meter when it came out, but I wouldn't call it a bad movie. It's very... comic book-like. Not in like a "comic book movie" is... it just literally feels like you're watching a comic book come to life.

[Sumac]

I think people are able to mentally compartmentalize the two AVP movies into their own private island of suck... but they certainly didn't help at all.
I have somewhat enjoyed first AVP, first time characters from my childhood together on the big screen, but it's certainly a mediocre movie.
Also, it had resembled a weird Predator 3 book I've read several years prior. In it Dutch and Hurricane work together on the Arctic base to take down special Predator send to make a final verdict - is human race advanced enough to stop hunting them or not. Some of the bits of the story are very similar to the AVP movie. Predator dies the same way as alien queen and I think there are some other similarities.

AVP2 was horrible.

"Predators" is a shame. I enjoyed it quite a lot, but #1, it had way too many forced callbacks to the original movie, many of the characters saying the same lines just because of nostalgia. Very annoying. #2, it's missing anything in the way of a satisfying ending. There should have been extra oomph there. It'd be like if Aliens had stopped with Ripley getting aboard that dropship on top of the building, and we never had the Queen battle on the Sulaco.
Yeah, the idea was good, but the movie have barely did anything with it and in general it felt underwhelming. The ending especially so.

It didn't really move the meter when it came out, but I wouldn't call it a bad movie. It's very... comic book-like. Not in like a "comic book movie" is... it just literally feels like you're watching a comic book come to life.
I like Predator 2 almost as the first one. It has unique atmosphere and I really love how it's not just a copycat of the first movie, but tries to do something different with the concept. Mike Hurricane is badass as well as his crew and Busey's own brand of ham certainly helps.
The ending is complete WTF, but it's fun.

[CyberCubed]

The Star Wars Sequel trilogy really HAS ruined the originals.

All the struggle, all the dying all the anguish and the joy at the end is completely squashed now. you know it pretty much means nothing.

No, it doesn't ruin movies that came out 30 years ago. The original Star Wars trilogy is mostly self contained, same reason people could ignore the prequels or all the extended universe comics/novels that came out for 20 years before the new movies.

Likewise the new trilogy IS 30 years later. It's not like Luke/Han/Leia all dropped dead the next day after episode 6 ended.

[sdp]

The Matrix Reloaded is the better film, Revolutions is just a generic sci-fi movie. Yes, Reloaded is totally pretentious and it doesn't have the best story but it did so much world building that totally worked. Rouge Programs? Different types of programs that have specific uses in the Matrix? This seems straight out of an on going show or video game series since each of those characters have plenty of possibilities.

You're given a bunch of things to question and they don't let you know. It keeps your interest into finding out what all these secrets are and then....Revolutions throws it all away for generic answers / fight with the machines. Revolutions retroactively makes Reloaded worse off since it gives unsatisfying answers to the questions pondered by it. But if we ignore Revolutions then I find Reloaded far more watchable than Revolutions since it at least has hope of having cool answers in that third movie after all the world building while Revolutions just squanders it all for a generic sci-fi flick.


No, it doesn't ruin movies that came out 30 years ago. The original Star Wars trilogy is mostly self contained, same reason people could ignore the prequels or all the extended universe comics/novels that came out for 20 years before the new movies.

Likewise the new trilogy IS 30 years later. It's not like Luke/Han/Leia all dropped dead the next day after episode 6 ended.


It definitely ruins future movies, the idea that you know "canonically" after the original films all those awesome adventures lead to absolutely nothing since it's still Empire v Rebels.

Yeah you can be one of those smart ass comments online "What sequel ______ never got a sequel?" But in a saga like Star Wars where you love the universe and want to watch more it just ruins the franchise for future entries and your only option is to be one of those weird nerds that ignore the prequels as not existing, so in a way he isn't entirely wrong. I know I feel less excited about Star Wars in general even if the original movies will always be there, it's hard to ignore everything else, especially for a franchise as big as SWs, these aren't cheap DTV movies.

[Andrew NDB]

It definitely ruins future movies, the idea that you know "canonically" after the original films all those awesome adventures lead to absolutely nothing since it's still Empire v Rebels.

There is that. Like, you see Admiral Ackbar leaning back in his chair, sighing in relief at the end of "Return of the Jedi"'s victory... but deep down you can't simply ignore (I mean, I guess you can, but it's still there) that you know he'll still be fighting Imperials 40 years later, and dying off-camera to help a bunch of "Rebels" that aren't rebels. And that's stupid and sucks.

[Leonardo_thebest]

I think from certain point of view Predator is beyond being ruined - AVP, AVP2, Predators. Some even consider Predator 2 being a bad movie.


Some people find it "meaningful deconstruction of the OT themes and that it is suppose to reflect real world". Well, those people can eat some ****. If they have ruined their own lives and become losers it doesn't mean that SW should reflect it. :P

You're so not self-aware.

[Leonardo_thebest]

The Star Wars Sequel trilogy really HAS ruined the originals.

All the struggle, all the dying all the anguish and the joy at the end is completely squashed now. you know it pretty much means nothing.

That was the point.
Nothing means anything. Welcome to reality.

[ProphetofGanja]

Star Wars totally sux now

In 10 years no one will be raving about the new trilogy or anthology films anymore

[Sumac]

The Matrix Reloaded is the better film, Revolutions is just a generic sci-fi movie. Yes, Reloaded is totally pretentious and it doesn't have the best story but it did so much world building that totally worked. Rouge Programs? Different types of programs that have specific uses in the Matrix? This seems straight out of an on going show or video game series since each of those characters have plenty of possibilities.

You're given a bunch of things to question and they don't let you know. It keeps your interest into finding out what all these secrets are and then....Revolutions throws it all away for generic answers / fight with the machines. Revolutions retroactively makes Reloaded worse off since it gives unsatisfying answers to the questions pondered by it. But if we ignore Revolutions then I find Reloaded far more watchable than Revolutions since it at least has hope of having cool answers in that third movie after all the world building while Revolutions just squanders it all for a generic sci-fi flick.
I'd say, there were not much answers to give after Neo talk with the Architect. Everything was answered more or less, the only thing that left is to advance plot.
Yeah, idea with multiple programs had potential, but you need some kind of TV show to fully explore it. I don't think interesting premise like this can be properly explored in a one single movie.

You're so not self-aware.
You are not even trying.

That was the point.
Nothing means anything. Welcome to reality.
Ah, yes, the most ****** justification possible.
It's good only for people with no imagination or an agenda. Or losers. So...:lol:

[Andrew NDB]

"Let's turn all the 1s to 0s... so we're all the same and everything and everybody is equal!"

I wonder where I've heard that ideology before...

[CyberCubed]

As I said before, you can pick and choose what movies to watch. Every single movie franchise has had a bad sequel in there somewhere if they go on for multiple iterations. Then of course you have the inevitable reboots that happen 10 years later, sometimes those are good but sometimes worse than the originals. As I said, you can just ignore them. I don't see what is so hard about this.

Die Hard 5 which I've never watched I heard was horrible. Does that make me dislike Die Hard 1-4? No, because I never watched it. Even if I eventually did it wouldn't make me change my opinion on the older movies because I can just ignore it.

Hell there's a Home Alone 3, 4 and 5? Who gives a crap? I just watch the first 2. People ignore bad movie sequels, this isn't rocket science.

[Sumac]

Die Hard 5 which I've never watched I heard was horrible.
It is horrible.
Boring and not exciting at all.

[Wildcat]

None. Like I’ve said, I think some people are way too cynical about movies. It’s hard explain but I just don’t view movies through the pessimism others do.

Sequels tend to be unfairly judged. Even if you don’t have preconceived ideas your mind already expects it to live up to something. They can to a point.

The problem is people want sequels to match the same level of “wonder” every time. It can only happen once because the idea can only establish itself once.

I always give the benefit of the doubt. As long as something is plausible within the context I’m fine with it. I’ll retrace scenes or something will occur to me and I think...ok I can see that.

Plus certain stuff can always be reworked or “fixed” in sequels. I mean sequels can just as easily improve something that wasn’t well received.

I do not agree bad movies can ruin franchises. If you can’t differentiate between them that’s on you. Sometimes they’re generic enough you can ignore them since they have no serious influence on storylines.

Then there’s the crowd who just like to be against stuff and say “cash-grab, garbage etc”. That’s not a real argument imo.

[Andrew NDB]

Die Hard 5 which I've never watched I heard was horrible.

It is horrible.
Boring and not exciting at all.

I'd never thought about this until now... but I think Die Hard 4 and 5 are, like, the perfect comparison pieces to the AVP films.

AVP 1 was PG-13, super light and big budget and... kind of entertaining if tame in what it was showing, and seemed "big," but only sparingly delivered but delivered nonetheless. Same as Die Hard 4.

AVP 2 was R, super gory, low budget and... not that entertaining and seemed rather small. Never delivered. Maybe in parts. Same as Die Hard 5.

Hell there's a Home Alone 3, 4 and 5?

You know, I've wondered about those movies for years. Particularly 4. I haven't even heard of 5. I say 4 only because it involves Kevin McCallister again, even if it's a different actor. 3 just had some different, random as*hole kid in a different scenario, as best as I can recall reading about it... hardly catnip to make one go and see it, even a kid.

[sdp]

None. Like I’ve said, I think some people are way too cynical about movies. It’s hard explain but I just don’t view movies through the pessimism others do.

Sequels tend to be unfairly judged. Even if you don’t have preconceived ideas your mind already expects it to live up to something. They can to a point.

The problem is people want sequels to match the same level of “wonder” every time. It can only happen once because the idea can only establish itself once.


I understand your point and I tend to go into sequels with this in mind, I'll use Jurassic Park as an example. The first movie hits a bunch of themes and it just doesn't lend to a sequel that can outdo the first film. But for those of us who loved the idea of having a world where dinosaurs exist in this island, we want to know more stories of what's happening in this world even if plot wise it can never outmatch the original. I enjoy The Lost World, /// and JW for what they are, fun dinosaur action but I know none of those films will be better.

More sequels to a story that don't necessarily compromise characters or ideas excessively are fine. Take TMNT III for example, it's not a great movie and has the turtles acting silly but you can ignore it easily and if they had made a TMNT 4 it would've been fine.

The point in the OP is more of a series of movies that has messed up characters for so long that no matter what they do in a sequel they can't fix it or that they've tried rebooting the idea so many times and keep failing that you just don't care to check out that franchise anymore.


You know, I've wondered about those movies for years. Particularly 4. I haven't even heard of 5. I say 4 only because it involves Kevin McCallister again, even if it's a different actor. 3 just had some different, random as*hole kid in a different scenario, as best as I can recall reading about it... hardly catnip to make one go and see it, even a kid.

Damn, now I feel inclined to watch the Home Alone sequels. I will forever love 1 and 2 even if it's basically the same movie.

HA3 came out when I was a bit older so I didn't care to check it out since there were other movies I'd rather ask for but counting it came out in the 90s I think I may find it entertaining even if only nostalgia of the way the movie is.

Isn't HA4 a reboot? HA 5 I also hadn't heard about and I remember looking the wikipedia of the Home Alone franchise maybe 2 years ago or so when I re-watched the first two films.

[Metalwolf]

"Alien"? Utterly destroyed by its creator with the one-two punch of Prometheus and Covenant.Jockey


Am I missing any here?This movie franchise has been the one I've been upset at the most.

Prometheus and Aliens: Covenant took away the 'alieness' of the Alien and Space Jockey, instead making it all connected around humans and some dumb android with daddy issues. I hate this producer 'explaining the mystery' just so he can insert his pet character David as the linchpin to it all, trying to make it 'deep' and have 'meaning' about the relationship between creator and creation, when that crap is for another genre entirely, not what should be a horror movie in space.

To me, the Alien is a monster that is just one of the cruel hazards of nature that exists out in a cold indifferent universe. It's not nice, it doesn't give a damn about humans, it just does what it can to survive in an extremely harsh environment. The Space Jockeys are just another alien surprise out there, strange elephantoid giants that roam space in their bizarre spaceships, who are just as alien as the Alien, and might even be as cold and unfeeling towards the fragile humans that get a glimpse of them.

Neither of these aliens had any connection to humans, and that is what makes the 'universe' so vast and scary. Ridley Scott grossly undermined what would have been two viable (but separate) franchise by not being able to bear having his precious android not see the light of day at that moment, so we got subjected to a 'deep' movie about the relationship between a creation and it's creator, lots of pretentious navelgazing, and the homoerotic line between two David models, 'You blow, and I'll finger,' in what is supposed to be a movie about some H.R Giger monsters in space.

I would not have begrudged R. Scott if he had made his concept into a totally separate franchise. But he pretty much made it very hard to recover, since now he's made these concepts indelibly 'tied' to this franchise, and we now have a few fans even rooting for what he did to the SJs and Aliens and how his character David is 'brilliant.'

[Wildcat]

I understand your point and I tend to go into sequels with this in mind, I'll use Jurassic Park as an example. The first movie hits a bunch of themes and it just doesn't lend to a sequel that can outdo the first film. But for those of us who loved the idea of having a world where dinosaurs exist in this island, we want to know more stories of what's happening in this world even if plot wise it can never outmatch the original. I enjoy The Lost World, /// and JW for what they are, fun dinosaur action but I know none of those films will be better.

More sequels to a story that don't necessarily compromise characters or ideas excessively are fine. Take TMNT III for example, it's not a great movie and has the turtles acting silly but you can ignore it easily and if they had made a TMNT 4 it would've been fine.Ya those are good examples. LW and 3 are just ok. They’re pretty basic Dino island movies but nothing significant happens that new ones need to account for other than mentioning them. I really like JW though. I think it’s the best JP sequel so far.

The point in the OP is more of a series of movies that has messed up characters for so long that no matter what they do in a sequel they can't fix it or that they've tried rebooting the idea so many times and keep failing that you just don't care to check out that franchise anymore.

Well for me I never lose interest in a favorite movie series. I still get excited to see what they do next or how they handle something that was poorly received. I mean that’s just me. I never find myself thinking...”oh no not again”.

Damn, now I feel inclined to watch the Home Alone sequels. I will forever love 1 and 2 even if it's basically the same movie.

HA3 came out when I was a bit older so I didn't care to check it out since there were other movies I'd rather ask for but counting it came out in the 90s I think I may find it entertaining even if only nostalgia of the way the movie is.

Isn't HA4 a reboot? HA 5 I also hadn't heard about and I remember looking the wikipedia of the Home Alone franchise maybe 2 years ago or so when I re-watched the first two films.I recommend watching 3 and 5. They’re nothing special but they’re entertaining at least for one watch imo.

4 uses the Kevin, his dad and Marv characters again (with different actors obviously) but it’s just not creative at all. The plot and the House had potential but they never take advantage of it. If you watch it you’ll understand.

[drgon78]

Transformers, Jurassic Park, The Matrix, Terminator, Alien, and Star Wars.

[ProactiveMan]

Police Academy. I was with them up until 7...

But seriously, if you mean the impossibility of a property continuing in a way that I would find satisfying; there are a few, but not very many that I'm all that cut up about. I can't think of any that have been keelhauled so badly that I can't still enjoy the entries that I like.

I'm an 'I like what I like' kind of guy.

[Andrew NDB]

Isn't HA4 a reboot?

Nothing I've read makes me think that it is...

sdsKJMI_myQ

Apparently the whole movie is on Youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymG3KsMIoJM

HA 5 I also hadn't heard about and I remember looking the wikipedia of the Home Alone franchise maybe 2 years ago or so when I re-watched the first two films.

Apparently 5, like 3, is another completely unrelated family. The true Home Alone trilogy is 1, 2, 4!