Spyke
coffinwoodreply
feddit.de

I found Dredd to be uninteresting violence pornography, but the generic story and characters would make a series of films for a niche audience possible.

The Stallone Dredd was silly and the sidekick was annoying at best, but I like it.

-20
Tyfudreply

The thing most of us like about it, was that it was very true to the comic book.

3

I agree, it was a good movie, hopefully it does not get destroyed with sequels

66
FaceDeerreply
kbin.social

I'm also surprised that the Terminator series never got a third instalment. Or Aliens, for that matter.

55
sbvreply
sh.itjust.works

I was really sad about the Aliens franchise ending after two movies. I was really looking forward to seeing what Newt, Ripley, and Hicks got up to in the next installment.

32

I heard some asshole was peddling a script that killed off Newt and Hicks in the first 2 minutes. Luckily they burned it...

3

No kidding. Same way I feel about Bill and Ted. Oddly, bot have Keanu.

4
neidureply

If I remember correctly, a sequel has been in development hell for years.

29
kbin.run

Constantine. Keanu Reeves has said he would like to do it, and there is a ton of story material to draw from between the Constantine series and all of the Hellblazers, not to mention cameos in other series.

109
Sir_Fridgereply
lemmy.world

Apparently they are working on a part 2. Peter stormare is confirmed to return as well.

54
lemmy.world

Edge of Tomorrow. Not a huge Tom Cruise fan, but that one really gets me. Emily Blunt is awesome in it. Went in not expecting much, but I was blown away.

Watched it last year and immediately searched to see if there was sequel in the pipe. Development hell.

106

In the book there are some references to Rita (Emily Blunt) fighting in various places and I think her getting her start in South America. Might be remembering that one wrong, but a prequel with her learning how to fight the monsters would have been good if they stuck more to the book.

13
Odoreply

Wrap a much larger time loop around the first movie.

8
lemmy.world

The Fifth Element

I'm glad it didn't get a sequel because it is such a good stand alone movie. I'm just shocked the studio didn't try to milk it for everything it had.

100
agamemnonymousreply
sh.itjust.works

Ironically, Luc Besson himself made two sequels to Arthur and the Invisibles, both novels and films.

3
Crashumbcreply
lemmy.world

Unfortunately, Bruce Willis has a severe form of dementia.

5

He did have his face/voice/body (???) mapped for AI/CGI (???) future movies and signed the release of it though, so itโ€™s possible.

A sequel to Fifth Element would probably suit a futuristic, CGI(ish) style too.

1
sh.itjust.works

That's exactly what the title would be. What's the plot? That Corben Dallas is also somehow a magical destined one? Ruby Rhod is now a monk?

3
Mugmoorreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Thay movie was awful. As a huge fan of the series, I don't know how anyone can watch it and understand the plot without being familiar with it beforehand.

The BBC series is much better, and goes up to Book 3 iirc.

13
lemm.ee

I disagree. I loved the film. I remember it fondly.

Do you like the books? I find that people who like or have read the books tend not to like the movie and vice versa. I do not like the books.

15
Tedrowreply
lemmy.world

I personally enjoyed the movie, the books, and the BBC series.

17
Doubleohdonutreply
lemmy.ca

Yeah the way I see it is that even Douglas himself didn't quite have a single vision in his mind about the story, which is why there are so many iterations (radio, book, movie, tv series, musical? Am I forgetting anything?)

8

The books, game, BBC radio series, BBC television series, and film were all written by Adams, each with slightly independent canon.

9
sh.itjust.works

The funny thing about THHGttG is that it exists several times simultaneously with wildly different canons. The original BBC radio show was the original, then they did the TV miniseries with much of the same talent (Mostly replacing Susan Sheridan with Sandra Dickenson as Trillian), THEN the book pentology, THEN the 2005 movie. They all start pretty similarly with Arthur's house and the pub and the Vogons, but then they go into all kinds of different directions in different orders.

11

For me personally, the plot doesn't matter all that much anyway. What I love is Douglas Adams' prose - the plot's mostly just a vehicle for that - and I feel that doesn't really translate to film. The perfect example:

The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't.

It's funny. It's succinct. It's very descriptive. It doesn't just tell you that the ships were hovering, it draws comparison to bricks which conjures up images of blocky, inelegant ships, and it gives the impression that the way they're just stationary in the sky is somewhat unsettling or surreal. I think it's quite impressive how much such a short sentence manages to convey really!

Translating it to film, and having shot of some blocky, inelegant ships hanging in the sky, doesn't manage to capture the same humour or feeling that that short sentence in the book does, at least for me. And it's the same throughout the whole series, but that line is probably the easiest example to bring up. Some books translate really well to film and the imagery in the film ends up being far better than what I could imagine myself on the fly, but that's not the case with Hitchhiker's Guide at all.

The Hitchhiker's Guide radio series has a fair amount of narration so the prose still shines through in that.

I had similar issues with the various Dirk Gently adaptations, too. And I find I have the same issue with screen adaptations of Terry Pratchett's work for similar reasons. Without Adams' or Pratchett's wonderful prose, it often tends to feel very B-movie-esque to me.

7

Agreed. Second-worst date movie ever. She was shellshocked and missed all the humour cues.

5
Son_of_dadreply
lemmy.world

It was ok. Didn't understand the side story with John Malkovich at all, pointless. And Zoey Deschanel was terrible as Trillen, like criminally awful at the role to the point she ruined it for me. Sam Rockwell was perfect casting though, same with mos Def and Martin Freeman

11
Jokerreply
discuss.tchncs.de

Sam Rockwell is cast perfectly in just about everything. Phenomenal actor. Kinda surprised we donโ€™t see him more.

10
formergijoereply
lemmy.world

No one else could have asked kids if they want regulars or menthols in the 1990 TMNT movie.

1

Yeah I was just joking with that. It just blows my mind that he was played by Sam Rockwell.

1
Mostly_Gristlereply
lemmy.world

I'm surprised it's never been made into a decent TV show. The entire thing has already been made into half-hour radio shows, so the scripts are there and road tested. It's basically halfway done already.

7
lemmy.world

Iโ€™m not necessarily surprised this one didnโ€™t get a sequel, but I really wish it had!

Event Horizon (1997)

65
Jonathanreply
lemmy.world

Oh, Iโ€™ve never heard that, Iโ€™ll have to look it up!

5
Huginreply

The theory is basically that in 40k ftl works by sending the ship through the warp (hell). Humans use a Gellar field to keep a bubble of reality around the ship while in the warp. The theory is this is humanities firstf tll so they don't know they need a Gellar field.

It's fun but other then the ftl is hell doesn't fit at all with the rest of 40k lore.

5
Patarikireply
feddit.nl

Apparently there was a directors cut that got lost somehow...

7

It was apparently too intense for test audiences, and this was in the pre-DVD-special-features era when no one bothered to keep cut footage. Maybe they cut too much. I watched it recently because I had heard fantastic things and I was just... generally unimpressed. It was an interesting concept that really wasn't very well explored, and the writing was so stiff.

5

I would love to see some sort of remastered directors cut of that movie. It has definitely started showing its age, but itโ€™s still high up on my list of great movies.

1
magnetospherereply
kbin.social

I read something about that a while ago. If I recall correctly, it was intended to be a franchise, but Master and Commander was so incredibly expensive that they decided against it.

12
Che Bananareply
lemmy.ml

I responded to this on another comment but from what I remember they got torpedoed by the MCU and thought they wouldn't be able to compete against them...however reading these comments here gives me hope as everyone seems to be over the CGIverse now.

1

Thatโ€™s surprising. Master and Commander came out in 2003, years before the first MCU film was released.

1
AlfredEinsteinreply
lemmy.world

I really liked the books. I thought the movie was good, but it didn't scratch the same itch the books did.

8
midwest.social

In 2021 there was some planning/writing done for a prequel, but I don't think anything came of it.

That film is having a bit of a cultural comeback, so there's still hope.

5
oursreply

And there's a whole bunch of more books to be adapted. That movie was so perfectly done I wish it had worked enough to allow a whole series of sequels.

4

Alita: Battle Angel. I've heard there is a sequel planned, but it's been a few years since the first movie. James Cameron is still involved as a producer, but I guess his blue-skinned money machine has kept him busy lately.

51
RunningInRVAreply
lemmy.world

Really? The movie was the handout for the people who were pissed the series didnโ€™t last longer. Asking for a second movie is a nonstarter, even if the first was good.

9

Wouldn't watch anything from Joss at this point anyways. 10 years ago I would have been all over a Firefly reboot or another movie, but Joss kinda dug his own grave on that by being a total piece of shit. And then after rewatching Buffy/ Angel, and Firefly so many times I realized that they are just the same stories and same characters with some different actors.

Serenity was the best thing Joss ever wrote and it was essentially a pity fuck.

8
Brutticusreply

Which, honestly, to be 100 percent honest, it wasn't. I hated the movie. I understand its my fatal flaw, but I look at works holistically. One of the things that got me into firefly was it's pacing; the promise that everything was going to have room to breathe. I would rather just have the first season; the movie crammed plot threads and character arcs meant to sustain an entire 5 season series into a 2 hour movie. Except its worse, because I got to see what the slow burn was like.

2
Nefara
lemmy.world

Still waiting for the Zootopia sequel. Genuinely good and creative movie that used the format to talk about tricky topics with some cushion and then became a cult favorite. They added some extra stuff under Zootopia+, they tee'd up the buddy cop format, did all this world building and then... what, Disney, this is the one IP you're not going to squeeze for all its worth? Where's the next one?

46

Hopefully, we'll find out who is getting milked to make the ice cream.

1

Master and commander... They had the ship built already too - why not make a sequel? There's about 20 books worth of material.

43

Adventures of Tintin. Peter Jackson was supposed to direct it, but unfortunately he got busy with Hobbit.

Apparently they were supposed to adapt Prisoners of the Sun, which is arguably the best Tintin storyline to make a movie of.

42

I would love to see a sequel. I really enjoy that movie. One of the few I like to rewatch.

6
JJROKCZ
lemmy.world

Pacific Rim, such a great fun mechs vs monsters movie that had a gritty feeling to it. Not over the top fantastical bullshit with flips or garish colors, just solid, slow, huge mechs fighting solid, slowish, sea monsters.

40
oursreply
lemmy.world

It's like they took everything in the original that made it work and threw it out.

For people wondering how much impact a film director makes, this is a prime example.

19
Canopyflyerreply
lemmy.world

I point to those two movies to illustrate a great director as opposed to an average one.

Pacific Rim is a brilliant film that pays homage to multiple films and genres.

Pacific Rim: Uprising is a terrible film that completely missed the point of the first movie.

2
oursreply

Sicario 1 and 2 as well except it's an example of an amazing director vs. a competent one.

At least Sicario 2 is quite watchable and has some amazing scenes. Can't say the same for Pacific Rim 2. That one's just bad and not even in a fun way. As you say, all the things that made the original work. It managed to miss all of them.

1
CarlosCheddarreply
lemmy.world

If I remember correctly Disney lost a lot of money on that movie. I liked it though.

18
snooggumsreply
kbin.social

It is explained in the link, but to summarize: The director wanted to name it John Carter of Mars because yes, that it would make more sense to name it after the main character for movie audiences. Then some dumbass Disney exec made them drop the 'of Mars' part because they didn't like the performance of other recent movies with 'Mars' in the name.

The reason dropping 'of Mars' was stupid is because it just made it someone's name which only works with a decent advertising campaign for a straightforward movie like John Wick.

12

If I recall correctly it was because of "Mars needs Moms" was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.

4
Jonnyreply
kbin.social

yeah, it was one of those movies that I think was ruined by the advertising. All the adverts at the time tried to make it seems like a star wars rip off, when it wasn't anything like star wars really.

10

John Carter inspired the inspirations for Star Wars, including Dune. Heck, if they had advertised it as the story that inspired [list of movies] it would have gone a long way in making it clear that it wasn't a ripoff.

9

Working out the numbers on IMDB, the estimated budget was $250,000,000. Gross worldwide: $284,139,100. Total from these numbers: $34,139,100.

The number(s) that are not represented, is how much Disney spent to market the movie. And since it was supposed to be their latest tentpole movie franchise, they must have spent the same amount they did on production (and perhaps more,) to market it. This means that Disney might have put $500 million or more into the whole project. Then they would have lost $215,860,900 or more.

7

I can see why it bombed. Itโ€™s one of the very few movies I ever turned off before it was over, and I watch a lot of movies. It was just so dull and had no soul. I could not bring myself to care about what was going on. Havenโ€™t thought about it since, until this thread.

1
Dethedrusreply
lemmy.world

I grew up with the original series and couldn't agree more. It was fun and only very slightly marred by no Mister T cameo.

11
mangoslothreply
lemmy.world

Fwiw I think rampage did a pretty solid job as BA, especially considering the pressure and expectations of having to replace mister t

5

I absolutely agree. I just missed him having a cameo like the rest of surviving main cast.

3

Man of Steel. It was a shot in the arm for DC movies, and the Superman character in film. Why they didnt follow up with a direct sequel, and instead released that dumpster fire Batman v Superman instead, I will never understand.

37
kreynen
kbin.social

Princess Bride

I always thought a sequel where the roles are reversed and Fred Savage is reading to an ailing Peter Faulk would have been a great way to start a sequel.

36
mysoulishomereply
lemmy.world

Haโ€ฆI donโ€™t think Peter Faulk was around for Fred Savage to grow up, sadly. Not the most healthy guy.

Edit: damn.

4
Decoy321reply
lemmy.world

Fred Savage was 35 years old when Peter Falk died in 2011. He was 83 at that time. Poor dude had Alzheimer's for those last few years.

They could've definitely filmed a reunion scene in the 90s, early 2000s though.

11

I enjoyed uprising. It deserved a sequel too though, and was clearly leading to things it didn't get to wrap up sadly. Well worth watching anyway though.

5
coffinwoodreply
feddit.de

It was so boring and uninspired. Reminiscence - The movie. Just regurgitating everything we saw in the original.

2
FaceDeerreply
kbin.social

I found it strange that the modern TRON felt so much more lifeless and drab than the original's, given the limitations on the original's technology. The worldbuilding was flatter, the characters were extra flatter, and the villain's plan didn't make any sense.

I almost wish he'd succeeded so that we could have seen Clu's giant digital aircraft carrier trying to squeeze through that laser emitter and cram itself into the basement of an abandoned arcade. Either it would wreck itself instantly or it'd come out as a wee little tiny thing, equally amusing outcomes.

8
ringwraithfishreply
startrek.website

Sometimes I feel like the only person on the planet that enjoyed the movie. It's my guilty pleasure watch.

4
FaceDeerreply
kbin.social

I mean, everyone's entitled to their own tastes. I've got my own guilty pleasures that I can readily admit aren't widely liked - the old TV series "Lexx", for example. Whenever I talk about that one I open with "Let me be clear that I'm not actually recommending this." :)

5
sh.itjust.works

I tried, and bounced off Lexx. And just went right on back to Farscape. Which...

Small band of misfit/outlaw aliens traveling in a living space ship having adventures and misadventures, both made as two-nation collaborations. And I'm not sure why I liked one and not the other.

1
FaceDeerreply
kbin.social

Well, Lexx has a very different vibe to it. I would add "thinks it's soft-core porn but it's awkward and nobody actually gets lucky" to Lexx's version of that description. :)

1

I've actually never read the series but now I'm kinda tempted. I think the Jumper series is a trilogy and the other books dive into the backstory of the parents.

2

The TV series actually helped with some of the pacing. Book and Series spoilers >!when I read the books after watching the series it's like a whiplash how fast the story progresses. Juliette went out after only 1/3 of the book!<

1

Dredd

Such a great movie that should've launched at least a trilogy, it was so much better than the Stalone movie, it kept the stakes relatively low, just a day-in-the-life sort of story, but did some great world-building. No "end of the world" stakes or anything silly, just some Judges trying to clear out a building, one apartment building in a mega-city.

27
lemm.ee

The Rock. It would have been very easy to set up another terrorist attack that is tied to Masonโ€™s spy past. Goodspeed is the only one who knows Mason is alive and where to find him. Would have been an easy hit.

27
lemmy.world

Kung Pow. The first one even had a trailer during the credits.

26
Lanusensei87reply
lemmy.world

Last time I checked they were searching for a film to repurpose into a sequel.

8
Odoreply

They repurposed some deleted scenes for that montage. You can see them on the DVD.

6

I was going to say "How the hell didn't Hunt for Red October" get a sequel?" But today I learned it sort of did; they've made like four other movies in the Clancy cinematic universe.

How about Galaxy Quest? I'm surprised they haven't made a Galaxy Quest sequel. Not because I think it needs one, but because it was a very popular and well received movie with stuff to talk about.

26
chiliedoggreply
lemmy.world

Galaxy Quest bombed at the box office.

Even so, there was talk of doing a sequel or even a series after it became a cult hit, but it stalled when Alan Rickman died.

16
MrEffreply

It was a few steps further than talks to make the sequel. It was going to be a Netflix/streaming series (6-10 episodes). They had funding lined up. They had scripts written but still being massaged and finalized. They had almost gotten everyone signed on and was finalizing details for the last signature. -then Alan Rickman died. Then it all fell apart, scripts would have all had to be redone and the whole story line redone, and thus funding pulled out. Then that was the end of it.

4
lemm.ee

John Lithgow should also play a role in it again. He totally made the movie awesome.

4
Aviandelightreply
mander.xyz

Well if we're going this route I would like to add in Kung Pow. I would've loved to see the sequel they teased at the end.

3

According to the director there were never plans for a sequel. It was just a joke he added to the end.

4

Just rewatched this one a few days ago. Still so much fun! And it's even got a sequel tease at the end, title and everything. :(

2
ares35
kbin.social

remo williams was a decent, entertaining movie that flopped in theaters. a tv pilot was also produced, and but didn't lead to a series order.

based on the popular the destroyer series of novels (of which there is now over 150 published), it had huge potential.

not all that 'surprising' given its lackluster performance at the box office, more a 'disappointment'.. although hollywood has made far worse.

21
Lifecoach5000reply
lemmy.world

What in the world. You just gave me a flashback of remembering seeing the video cover at the VHS rental place when I was a small kid and thinking that movie looked super cool. Never ended up seeing it though.

4

Man I came here to say that. With a subtitle like "The Adventure Begins" it really does beg for a sequel. It's a fun little movie.

3

I'm almost certain there was more than one episode of Remo Williams. But all I can remember is Roddy McDowall as a martial arts guru of some sort, and Remo using the spray from a water hose to get off the roof of a building.

2

And it ended up being a very well done trilogy. I was NOT expecting that.

7

This thread needs more explanations than just straight responses.

Anyways, I will say that the most surprising to me was Dredd. I mean, I shouldn't really be surprised because it didn't do well in the Box Office, but it was just so awesome. Was such a great movie all around and I really wanted to learn more about that world.

19

I'd be all about a prequel series for Morgan Freeman's character in Se7en. Only if David Fincher returned to direct through.

18

Elf.

I know Will turned down an obscene amount of money for it, and it was prolly the right decision, but I'm still surprised a sequel never got made given how popular Elf continues to be.

18

Nightmare Before Christmas. Not that I want a sequel, mind you, but it is Disney weโ€™re talking about here. Itโ€™s like a to tobacco addict turning down one specific brand of cigarettes.

17

The end credits talk of a sequel, โ€œBuckaroo Bonzai against the World Crime Leagueโ€ - that script ended up being repurposed into โ€œBig Trouble in Little Chinaโ€

11
lemmy.world

Speed Racer. Loved the silliness and the love and passion the film had. Unfortunately I believe to much time has passed, the cast must have aged. But so glad we had the best racing movie in my opinion, had so much heart and car-fu

16

I loved the movie but I think the studio lost their asses on it financially.

6

I stayed away when it was in the theaters, then saw that it was on Netflix and figured I'd give it a chance.

So ridiculously good.

4

that movie was one of the first movies i remember crying at. along with monsters inc

3

Technically, the 2019 series is a prequel. OP asked for a sequel.

I haven't watched the series yet.

2

I really liked it, and more than the movie. But I saw them in that order.

2
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Commenting to take notes of movies that weren't ruined by useless sequels.

I wasn't really surprised it didn't get a sequel but I remember that "The golden compass" was made to have sequels from the get go and i think even ended with a cliffhanger, or maybe not. I juste remember feeling like the story was cut short. I didn't feel this with the Harry potter movies despite being another adaptation of a book, so they probably screwed up.

14

thanks. The "on HBO" made me miss the feeling of trying to catch the episodes of my favorite shows on tv when kid. I rarely would , but it was an adventure.

4
Brutticusreply

Is it any good? I was a big fan of the books as a kid.

1
lemm.ee

It's based on the first book of a trilogy, the series is called His Dark Materials, and was a fucking travesty of a film adaptation. I'm honestly glad they didn't go forward with the rest, I doubt they would have handled the other two any better.

I can't speak on Amazons attempt, haven't gotten around to it yet, but can recommend the books. They're a good read.

12
Diabolo96reply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

His dark Materials? Now, that's a catchy name.

I really liked the world shown in the movie so will certainly give it a read.

4
loobkoobreply
kbin.social

BBC/HBO did a TV adaptation of the full series, aptly called "His Dark Materials". I didn't enjoy it quite as much as I did the books, but it was a good adaptation (and much better than The Golden Compass).

The books won a bunch of awards and were very well received when they released. The first one, Northern Lights (The Golden Compass in the US) came out in 1995 so it was fairly popular for a few years as the "premier" young adult novel, but it ended up being dwarfed in popularity by Harry Potter once that released (as did, well, everything else on the planet).

I think the books were a little less popular and well-received in America. In part because Philip Pullman is a British author, so obviously he got more attention here in the UK. But also, quite a few Christian groups - particularly in America because, let's be honest, most evangelical Christian groups are American - took issue with His Dark Materials' world and themes. It doesn't paint the church in a good light at all, and the series' God analogue, The Authority, is pretty tyrannical. Although, funnily enough, a former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, was one of the biggest supporters of the series - he felt it basically highlighted the dangers of dogmatism and attacked the ways religion could be used to oppress rather than Christianity itself - so obviously not all Christians were offended by the series.

Anyway, yes! Not only is the world fantastic (and it only gets more interesting and wild as the series goes on) but it also handles the characters really well. The way it handles the main characters - children who age into teenagers throughout the series - developing feelings for each other and discovering sexuality was done in a really thoughtful and age-appropriate way (for the characters and the audience). It addresses some interesting philosophical concepts, too, including some religious ones - I'd say the spirit, the body and the soul is a pretty key theme throughout, albeit not necessarily in the same way Christianity approaches it

I'd start by reading the books - Northern Lights/The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass - and then watch the TV series. He's also written other books in the world - some novellas, and (currently) two out of three books in a second trilogy called "The Book Of Dust".

10

Well said! I read the books long before the first movie, and have seen all the screen adaptations, and pretty much agree with you. Hell, my 12 year old Border Collie is named Lyra! However, I actually mostly enjoyed HBOs TV series, even with all the changes and such, which i was expecting because it was a screen adaptation. Didnโ€™t much care for the new characters, but i was able to get over it because of all the other parts that were well done. They did a great job appropriately making you dislike Ms. Coulter! I forgot all about the newer books, though! Thanks for the reminder!

4
Brutticusreply

I read Lyra's Oxford but there were more?

Also, you talk about "themes and world building not paining the church in a good light", and I am just here to say, that's a hell of an understatement. The primary mythic fantasy war is about a guy going to war with God. Capitol 'G' god the father God. In the end, ::: spoiler spoiler "God" is revealed to the a senile old angel. He also lied about creating anything; he just spawned from the dust first. The war in heaven was really about if they should let him die, or maintain the illusion. :::

I believe I read somewhere Philip Pullman intended to create the anti Narnia.

2
Todayreply

The books were so good! My whole family plowed through them. Movie/tv had none of the......page turning excitement of Philip Pullman's books.

4
roamic
lemmy.world

John Dies at the End

They have the books and all, just make it.

14
SCBreply

They'd need to start completely fresh with JDATE, because the existing movie clearly ran out of money like 40 minutes in.

I'd like to see it as a streaming series, personally, with Futuristic Violence and Fancy Suits as a movie franchise.

6

It was planned but Will Farrel didn't like the script and refused to do the movie. And apparently he and Jon Favreau didn't get along on the first one.

1

How Stella Got Her Groove Back. Taye Diggs poking MILFs back to health could have become annual event theater like Fast and the Furious.

I say first week in October. The leaves are changing. Pumpkin spice is back. Every mom in America would buy new shoes and be there in an outfit sheโ€™d been mentally choosing for 4 months.

12

Knick Knack. It's one of the earliest Pixar films that were made. They could make an actually amazing story out of this.

But all they did was include it as a bonus feature on the Finding Nemo DVD, and I guess a couple others idk.

11

"In 1915, Don Juan, Elizabeth, their dog Smile, and their pet mice Top Connors and Ronnie, are tasked by the U.S. Navy to explore the ocean depths in search for the wreck of the Titanic."

3

There is honestly more than enough potential in her sisters' stories for several movies. Especially their service during the great war as HMHS Britannic and "Ol' reliable" HMT Olympic

1

Kung Fury has a sequel and it's been finished for several years, I'm just suprised the damn movie hasn't released yet. They were suing some company because they were owed money by them but that's settled now and we have no word as to why it's not out yet.

10

The Last Starfighter

It was a really cool movie that I think fondly of from my childhood. Thereโ€™s been a โ€œpotential sequelโ€ in the works for like 15 years.

9

Watchmen. The series just wasn't as good. But Watchmen the movie, is one of my favorite superheroes movie of all time. Dark and funny.

9

The better the film is, the less likely it gets a sequel. (Or an Oscar.)

Blade Runner, for example. Released in 1982. Oh sure, it got one in 2015 ... because the slo-mo's had 33 years to catch up. And half the original audience was no longer around to mock it.

8
lemmy.world

if a movie didn't get a sequel it is either the greates masterpiece ever made or so unbelievably bad no one tried to save the idea. so i'm fine with pretty much any movie not getting a sequel. but i do wonder why star wars visions never went anywhere (technically not a movie but a series)

6
Lemminaryreply
lemmy.world

it is either the greates masterpiece ever made

Sorry to say that Mean Girls did in fact get a sequel

11
AtmaJnanareply
lemmy.world

Nope, there was no sequel.

It is getting a remake this year, though. Jon Hamm and Tina Fey.

1
DesertCreosotereply
lemm.ee

It's not exactly a remake, it's an adaptation of the Mean Girls musical.

1
agamemnonymousreply
sh.itjust.works

Ah, common logical mistake. A =โŸฉ B does not imply B=โŸฉ A, like squares and rectangles.

'No sequel' =โŸฉ 'film very bad' OR 'film very good'

does not imply

'Film very bad' OR 'film very good' =โŸฉ 'no sequel'

In the same way

Square =โŸฉ rectangle

does not imply

Rectangle =โŸฉ square

3
KptnAutismusreply
lemmy.world

like in star wars. ep.7 was hilariously bad, yet they tried to save it 2 more times and failed both times.

contrary to that, the prequels were quite good. and they got sequels.

1
SCBreply
lemmy.world

contrary to that, the prequels were quite good. and they got sequels.

Lol it's so cute how you can tell how old someone is by whether or not they liked the prequels.

0
KptnAutismusreply
lemmy.world

they're not universally hated like the sequels. there are always people who don't like a movie for one reason or another. and making fun of people who like specific movies is pathetic, old man.

1
Gumbyreply
lemmy.world

They were definitely pretty much universally hated by anybody past puberty when they came out. Some of that has mellowed over the past 20 years (rose-tinted glasses & all), but the backlash against them was massive. I think it's fair to say that there is a pretty hard line in how popular the prequels are based on how old the person was when they first came out (obviously, there are always exceptions).

That being said, they all at least do have some really cool individual moments in them.

1

i have rewatched them a few times since they came out.

i do think the are a little worse than the originals and they are by far not my favorite movies ever, but they are decently coherent, and they fleshed out the lore of star wars quite a bit.

these movies are what got me into star wars the way i am into FNAF or similar franchises now.

i have to respect them for that.

plus they have awesome VFX.

1

Good Burger was exactly what it was intended to be, a fun over the top silly movie. Viewed in that light it was decent.

1

Not necessarily a sequel but kinda surprised they didn't make a prequel to coraline

6

R.O.T.O.R. they teases the sequel at the end, but I guess it'll never happen.

5

I'm late to the party here, but since I didn't see it mention elsewhere, I'll throw up unbreakable with Bruce Willis. given his health conditions, it won't happen with him but it might be able to happen with somebody else in his place.

I feel like that movie established some solid characters and a somewhat unique case of the every man turned superhero. The whole idea of him just being able to touch someone and then get a glimpse into their hidden life was really cool. Plus there was the relationship with his son, bad guy suffering from that brittle bone disease to contrast with Bruce Willis's character being, well, unbreakable. it was a good setup I thought for a whole series of films.

3
Donebrachreply
lemmy.world

based on the ending of the movie, Tom Jane being tried for a multiple homicide I guess. my understanding is the book ends with them just driving into the mist so maybe, uh, them hitting a large boulder the size of a small bolder.

9
notavikingreply
lemmy.world

Had two, third was shit. But they were more same universe(s), not same story.

8
littlecoltreply
lemm.ee

God I love 10 Cloverfield Lane. Brilliant film. Jaw-dropping performance from John Goodman.

15

Yeah he was brilliant, probably one of the most underrated villains in film.

2

I thought they were more of a multiverse vibe/anthology, tied together with the common thread of alien monsters. apparently though an actual sequel for the first film is in development

2

Iโ€™m pretty sure 10 Cloverfield Lane is actually set after the first film. Only The Cloverfield Paradox involves the multiverse.

1
lemmy.world

Iโ€™m convinced this is a marketing ploy.

Either that or itโ€™s a good faith question that Iโ€™m worried will be scraped by some desperate studio that will then force feed us a Netflix algorithm style โ€œplease everyone until the film means nothingโ€ movie lol

2
CmdrShepardreply
lemmy.one

I thought that when the top comment was talking about Zootopia not getting a sequel, when it has already been announced. They uploaded a trailer to YouTube 16 hours ago...

1
EK13reply
lemmy.world

Youโ€™re right about the sequel being announced but do you have a link to the trailer? The only videos and articles I can find still seem to be speculative.

2
CmdrShepardreply
lemmy.one

I didn't watch it but if you Google Zootopia 2 it's the first result

1
EK13reply

I think weโ€™re looking at the same video then, the one with less than 10,000 views after 24 hours. Yeah that video isnโ€™t a real trailer, itโ€™s just using recycled clips from the first film and guessing what might happen in the second one

4