Two Socks
Sophomore
Optimism - pass it on!
@twosocks
Posts: 115
Likes: 37
 
|
Post by Two Socks on Mar 13, 2017 10:40:25 GMT
tutuanimationprincess said it better than I could.
|
|
nerdbomber
Freshman
@nerdbomber
Posts: 72
Likes: 8
|
Post by nerdbomber on Mar 13, 2017 13:18:34 GMT
As the subject of sequels has become a big part of this topic, I thought I would clarify all fronts regarding this. Regarding Disney sequels: After the bombing of Rescuers Down Under, Disney has shied away from big budget, theatrical release sequels. All sequels up to this point have been cheapquels released by the secondary Disney Toon studios. That seems poised to change soon with Frozen 2 and Wreck-It Ralph 2 on the horizon as big budget sequels. Regarding Pixar sequels: For a long time, Pixar avoided sequels mainly due to difficulty of maintaining ownership of their own franchises. After the Disney buy out, this was no longer a problem. Just the same, I feel that the Cars franchise has been the only questionable sequel making by Pixar and Pixar has already announced their sequel making is going on hiatus soon so I'm still not going to accuse them of franchise milking. Regarding Dreamworks sequels: The company essentially started off with the model of "if it's a success, franchise the hell out of it". Believe it or not, both Road to El Dorado and Sinbad were meant to be the beginning of franchises, showcasing how early the company had this mentality. Obviously those weren't hits, but Dreamworks has fully applied there strategy elsewhere. There's a friggin Shrek 5 on the way despite the less than positive responses to the last two films. Also, Madagascar being a franchise still confuses me to this day. I'm at least glad that How To Train Your Dragon is getting the trilogy treatment, but the script changes for the second film have largely killed ) this franchise from reaching the greatness it could hav At the end of the day, sequels should only come when there is legitimate reason. Cars not withstanding, Pixar is the only company to mostly follow this logic. What exactly is a "legitimate reason," besides whether it makes sense to keep the story going and there's (good) material for it? They could make 60 Shreks or 90 Toy Storys and as long as they're quality films narratively and technically, and people want to keep seeing them - so what. I would have loved to see El Dorado and Sinbad as franchises, as those movies lent themselves well to being serialized - like, would it have been such a bad thing to see Eris come back and mess with Sinbad and his crew as a regular thing? And I would have watched the hell out of Miguel and Tulio continuing to bullshit their way through mesoamerica. From what I've heard, either one or both of those were going to be TV series and not necessarily movies, in the same vein as what Disney had done for Hercules, Aladdin, and Tarzan. Dreamworks is no more sequel-thirsty than anyone else. Spirit was a moderate success and they're only getting around to a reboot now, 15 years after it was released. Pixar already had Toy Story 2 out before Dreamworks' first-ever theater-level sequel (Shrek 2). Pixar has been franchising a similar number of properties with a similar quality level, for just as long as Dreamworks has. There is no reason whatsoever why Toy Story 4 or Finding Dory need to exist - both stories felt complete with what was already out there - except to cash in on millennial nostalgia. There's also no need for all the Disney remakes, as most of them are mediocre successors to the originals. How is the live-action Lion King even going to work?? All I'm seeing is double standards and some weird, nebulous hatred for sequels. |
|
|
|
Post by TutuAnimationPrincess on Mar 13, 2017 16:41:56 GMT
Sorry, I didn't mean to come off as overly bias or totally anti sequel. It's pretty difficult assessing what films should or shouldn't get sequels but I still feel that the decision shouldn't be made lightly. I admit I just dislike how over saturated with sequels animation has become. Sequels in animation used to be rare, but companies like DreamWorks and Blue Sky started showing the profitability of franchising. Before then, Disney and Pixar had only made one theatrical sequel each. Now Pixar is churning them out too and Disney looks to be following suit soon. My complaint doesn't really concern the films themselves, those are judged on an individual basis as with any film. I just get bothered when it seems like every other mainstream animated film is a sequel. I was more lenient with Pixar, somewhat unfairly, but that's probably because they are putting an end to their mass sequel output soon. Still, this is all a preference thing, I would never tell anyone what they should or shouldn't enjoy. I'll finish this with a couple side notes on more specific points.
I never meant to say I was for or against sequels for the early 2D DreamWorks films, Sinbad in particular though easily lends itself to more adventures. I'm just not a fan of the practice of making every film with sequels in mind. I understand larger companies are bottom line thinking by design, but they shouldn't be so blatant with it.
I thought Finding Dory did more than enough to justify it's existence but I agree we don't need another Toy Story.
I never brought up or defended the Disney live action remakes. Personally I'm indifferent to them as I'm more an animation fan than a Disney fan.
Anyways, at the end of the day I just want good films regardless if they're sequels or not. Also, lucky for us, there's so much more animation out there beyond the big mainstream companies so I know quality stuff will always be available.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2017 0:09:48 GMT
I have very love of the company Post-2003. I used to look at them as a healthy alternative and rival to Disney that would hopefully keep both companies on their toes, but then they just started releasing crap, with few exceptions. I liked Over the Hedge, the first How to Train Your Dragon (the sequel can go to Hell and die), and... that's about it of their Post-2003 offerings.
|
|
Stuart "2-D" Pot
Sophomore
Guess who's back?
@startrekkie1202
Posts: 315
Likes: 71
|
Post by Stuart "2-D" Pot on Mar 15, 2017 12:30:19 GMT
As of boss baby they are starting to go to crap. Hopefully how to train your dragon 3 will get them back on track
|
|
nerdbomber
Freshman
@nerdbomber
Posts: 72
Likes: 8
|
Post by nerdbomber on Mar 15, 2017 18:26:07 GMT
Also, lucky for us, there's so much more animation out there beyond the big mainstream companies so I know quality stuff will always be available. True. I was especially excited for Kubo (by Laika) - and disappointed it didn't get the recognition it deserved. Wasn't gonna happen though, going up against the likes of Zootopia or Finding Dory. Or Sausage Party.  |
|
misstique
Sophomore
@misstique
Posts: 589
Likes: 367
|
Post by misstique on Mar 16, 2017 8:29:59 GMT
No love for "The Croods"? I really enjoyed that movie.
|
|
nerdbomber
Freshman
@nerdbomber
Posts: 72
Likes: 8
|
Post by nerdbomber on Mar 17, 2017 19:51:27 GMT
No love for "The Croods"? I really enjoyed that movie. loved the croods! so disappointed to hear they're not doing the sequel anymore.  |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 17, 2017 21:37:15 GMT
I get it. That's what they're good at. And the semi-serious stuff like How to Train Your Dragon too apparently. It's a shame they can't stick with it and do all these dumbass movies like Boss Baby.
|
|
misstique
Sophomore
@misstique
Posts: 589
Likes: 367
|
Post by misstique on Mar 18, 2017 5:30:22 GMT
No love for "The Croods"? I really enjoyed that movie. loved the croods! so disappointed to hear they're not doing the sequel anymore. That's a real shame about the sequel getting cancelled. But why? The movie did well at the box-office. And much worse movies have gotten sequels, so why not The Croods? |
|
nerdbomber
Freshman
@nerdbomber
Posts: 72
Likes: 8
|
Post by nerdbomber on Mar 18, 2017 18:23:06 GMT
loved the croods! so disappointed to hear they're not doing the sequel anymore. That's a real shame about the sequel getting cancelled. But why? The movie did well at the box-office. And much worse movies have gotten sequels, so why not The Croods? probably part of the reshuffling of priorities since nbc/universal took over - with httyd, kung fu panda, and goddamn shrek-whatever number they're going to do next, it's likely they felt dwa was too oversaturated with sequels. or maybe just oversaturated with projects in general. they killed larrikins, too. which is really disappointing as it seems like the weirdly charming stuff that's usually right up dreamworks' alley. |
|
number1212
Freshman
@number1212
Posts: 87
Likes: 12
|
Post by number1212 on Mar 19, 2017 22:05:19 GMT
Dreamworks in the most inconsistent studio in terms of quality to me. On one hand they have fantastic movies like Shrek and How To Train Your Dragon but on the other hand they have dreck like Shark Tale and Madagascar.
|
|
number1212
Freshman
@number1212
Posts: 87
Likes: 12
|
Post by number1212 on Mar 19, 2017 22:06:42 GMT
No love for "The Croods"? I really enjoyed that movie. I love The Croods. It's probably my third favorite Dreamworks movie. |
|
