Shitty sequels

[ultros3]

Many movie sequels suck. Not all of them, but once the movie has been made, they have to think up a plot for the next movie, which might not be as original.

Rocky XII- The Return of the Hobgoblins

Also, it seems that movies always try to "up the ante" when they make sequels. For example...
Jurassic Park- Had a T-Rex. Cool.
The Lost World- Had TWO T-Rexes.
Jurassic Park III- Had a Spinosaur. Woah.

Star Wars/EmpireStrikesBack/ReturnoftheJedi- Lightsabers.
The Phantom Menace- A DOUBLE-BLADED LIGHTSABER! Holy shit.
The Clone Wars- Anakin uses TWO lightsabers.
Revenge of the Sith- Grievous uses FOUR lightsabers. What an animal.

[Veranan]

how dare you say star wars has shitty sequels!

/sarcasm

[OddlyPoetic]

Dude, any movie is going to suck when you mentally reduce its appeal based on how many of something it has. The whole point of the movies isn't to have more lightsabers. You gotta think deeper then that.

That said, i agree the new Star Wars Saga kinda sucks.

[Veranan]

At 7/11/09 07:56 PM, Leidolfr wrote: out of the three "new" ones, which are the older story....yeah anyways, out of those, the first 2 new ones suck, and the last one was ok, as for the original trilogy, no, they were all ground shatteringly awesome, in every way they could have been, at that point in history,

yea i agree, the three old ones (part 4-6) were the best ones, but part 3 beats 1 and 2 by far

[ultros3]

At 7/11/09 07:58 PM, OddlyPoetic wrote: Dude, any movie is going to suck when you mentally reduce its appeal based on how many of something it has. The whole point of the movies isn't to have more lightsabers. You gotta think deeper then that.

That said, i agree the new Star Wars Saga kinda sucks.

I'm not saying the movies weren't good, just that I find it funny the different ways producers try to make films more exciting.

[OddlyPoetic]

At 7/11/09 08:00 PM, ultros3 wrote:

I'm not saying the movies weren't good, just that I find it funny the different ways producers try to make films more exciting.

They do, but they do tons more then just use extra light sabors.

[TheJamoke]

At 7/11/09 07:56 PM, Leidolfr wrote: out of the three "new" ones, which are the older story....yeah anyways, out of those, the first 2 new ones suck, and the last one was ok, as for the original trilogy, no, they were all ground shatteringly awesome, in every way they could have been, at that point in history,

I have probably never agreed more with any single statement made on the bbs, word for word.

[ultros3]

At 7/11/09 08:02 PM, OddlyPoetic wrote:

At 7/11/09 08:00 PM, ultros3 wrote:

I'm not saying the movies weren't good, just that I find it funny the different ways producers try to make films more exciting.

They do, but they do tons more then just use extra light sabors.

Perhaps you are correct.

Wanna buy some deathsticks?

[g-muff]

All lethal weapon sequels. I mean the first film wasn't that bad, but the sequels were horrible. How they managed to get away with making another three films is beyond me.

[BlakeMo]

I guarantee there's still other ones out there too.

Search bar is your friend.

[Obsessed117]

original trilogy, no, they were all ground shatteringly awesome, in every way they could have been, at that point in history,

I have probably never agreed more with any single statement made on the bbs, word for word.

Are you guys sure? Return of the jedi was pretty "meh" at some parts so I wouldn't call that one to be quite "ground shatteringly" awesome. I would rate star wars like this:

Empire Strike back > New hope > Return of the jedi >>>> Revenge of the sith *threshold of good movie and crappy movie* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>ghostbusters 2 > Phantom menace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>dog shit>>>>>>>>>>>>>Revenge of the sith.

[dajudge]

Looks like i'm the only person who thinks eps 1-3 were better...

[Absurd-Ditties]

Alien.

Aliens.

[AJ]

there's a 95 percent chance that twilight is going to have a sequel since there's more books out. i don't think it's physically possible to make a movie shittier than twilight, but then again, i didn't think it was possible to make a movie as shitty as twilight in the FIRST PLACE, so my vote is on future twilight videos that haven't even sucked yet.

[wedgeman]

At 7/11/09 07:53 PM, Veranan wrote: how dare you say star wars has shitty sequels!

/sarcasm

are you talking about the sequels or prequels? because if it is the sequels, then they should have stopped at #6, or #3, depends on how you look at it.
If you're talking about the prequels, I totally agree with you, 1, 2 and 3 should be burned. Or if you look at in terms of when they were made, 4,5 and 6.

/Lame attempt to confuse everyone.

[supperman2]

At 7/11/09 09:59 PM, TheMaster wrote: Alien.

Aliens.

To quote the AVGN, Aliens is referring to the fact that there are multiple aliens this time, so it's consistent with the plot. It works. Same with Alien 3 since there's only one alien again and there's really nothing else they could have called it.

[JRocks]

this thread is now about starwars.

[AJ]

At 7/11/09 10:34 PM, JRocks wrote: this thread is now about starwars.

welcome to the internet. pretty soon the "trekkies" are gonna get on here and a "flame war" will ensue.