|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Oct 8, 2018 1:04:22 GMT
Grease, there was no need for a sequel which just sucked anyway. Breakin' the sequel "Electric Boogaloo" became a term for unnecessary sequels. Oddly the sequel was planned from the first film as it is mentioned at the end. Ghostbusters, I like the original film but all they can really do for a sequel is the same thing as the first film. Which they pretty much do, right down to fighting City Hall again. Teen Wolf - Sequel doesn't even have M J Fox and is basically a remake of the first. Blues Brothers - Even if Belushi was still alive it would be pointless but with the ever dull Goodman?! Grease 2 could have worked, if the producers had more integrity, insight and weren't after a quick cash grab. They hired the female choreographer from the first film who had never directed before and it all fell flat. They lost all the magic and charm that made the first work so wonderfully and that is also due to the lack of nostalgic era representation as well. Pandering to the early 80's music sensibilities, for something set in the early 60's was not a good call.
Ghostbusters 2 came out too late after the original and therefore old hat by then.
Never liked the first Teen Wolf, though M J Fox made it work as much as possible with his charisma and charm. The sequel was just a another quick cash grab too and Bateman is just a bland screen presence.
Didn't even bother with the Blues Brothers sequel. Landis's original classic only need be re-watched and I also never got the Goodman thing either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 2:07:17 GMT
Grease, there was no need for a sequel which just sucked anyway. Breakin' the sequel "Electric Boogaloo" became a term for unnecessary sequels. Oddly the sequel was planned from the first film as it is mentioned at the end. Ghostbusters, I like the original film but all they can really do for a sequel is the same thing as the first film. Which they pretty much do, right down to fighting City Hall again. Teen Wolf - Sequel doesn't even have M J Fox and is basically a remake of the first. Blues Brothers - Even if Belushi was still alive it would be pointless but with the ever dull Goodman?! Grease 2 could have worked, if the producers had more integrity, insight and weren't after a quick cash grab. They hired the female choreographer from the first film who had never directed before and it all fell flat. They lost all the magic and charm that made the first work so wonderfully and that is also due to the lack of nostalgic era representation as well. Pandering to the early 80's music sensibilities, for something set in the early 60's was not a good call.
Ghostbusters 2 came out too late after the original and therefore old hat by then.
Never liked the first Teen Wolf, though M J Fox made it work as much as possible with his charisma and charm. The sequel was just a another quick cash grab too and Bateman is just a bland screen presence.
Didn't even bother with the Blues Brothers sequel. Landis's original classic only need be re-watched and I also never got the Goodman thing either.
Was Grease 2 set in the 60's? Wow, I honestly thought it was the 70's just the way the whole thing looks but I haven't seen the film in a long time either. That said some of the songs from the original sounded 80's anyway. GB 2 and Teen Wolf 2 were like remakes for me, same story in the case of TW2 same story, different actor/character. It also looked like it had a much cheaper budget. I never bothered with BB2 either, way too long after the original for a start even if Belushi were still alive and John Goodman is so ordinary and safe. Dan Akroyd by that point had become pretty boring too. If he had to do a sequel than Jim Belushi who I think was originally going to be in it would have been better, at least he has an interest in the Blues as well as being related to John. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Oct 8, 2018 2:17:48 GMT
Grease 2 could have worked, if the producers had more integrity, insight and weren't after a quick cash grab. They hired the female choreographer from the first film who had never directed before and it all fell flat. They lost all the magic and charm that made the first work so wonderfully and that is also due to the lack of nostalgic era representation as well. Pandering to the early 80's music sensibilities, for something set in the early 60's was not a good call.
Ghostbusters 2 came out too late after the original and therefore old hat by then.
Never liked the first Teen Wolf, though M J Fox made it work as much as possible with his charisma and charm. The sequel was just a another quick cash grab too and Bateman is just a bland screen presence.
Didn't even bother with the Blues Brothers sequel. Landis's original classic only need be re-watched and I also never got the Goodman thing either.
Was Grease 2 set in the 60's? Wow, I honestly thought it was the 70's just the way the whole thing looks but I haven't seen the film in a long time either. That said some of the songs from the original sounded 80's anyway. GB 2 and Teen Wolf 2 were like remakes for me, same story in the case of TW2 same story, different actor/character. It also looked like it had a much cheaper budget. I never bothered with BB2 either, way too long after the original for a start even if Belushi were still alive and John Goodman is so ordinary and safe. Dan Akroyd by that point had become pretty boring too. If he had to do a sequel than Jim Belushi who I think was originally going to be in it would have been better, at least he has an interest in the Blues as well as being related to John. Grease came out in 78', so it was more grounded in 70's sensibilities, but still had that nostalgic flair for the late 50's. That is why its appeal was so broad. It pandered to both the older generation and the younger generation at the time. It was boppy, but also 50's rocky and the music didn't go for the contemporary 70's funky sound. It was cleverly conceived. Grease 2 I think was set around 62'.
BB was one of a kind, an epic comedy with cool and hip music, 2 simpleminded but endearing lead characters and over the top hilarity and mayhem, which was all beautifully blended together.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2018 7:11:48 GMT
'Jumanji' by far. I thought there was still a chance we would get a sequel for it when Robin Williams was still alive and they could have brought back Kirsten Dunst but after he died I thought there were zero chances of 'Jumanji' ever getting a sequel and thought a movie without him in it would have flopped. 
|
|
