View Full Version : highlander why did they ruin it with crap sequels

05-27-2002, 06:08 PM
highlander is one my fav films of all time cristopher lambert sean connery queen soundtrack the whole thing is perfect especially the ending there can be only one.so why has there been 3 shit sequels and an even worse tv series.i blame lambert in a way hes one of my fav actors but he seems to go for the money too often without thinking of the consiquences.anyway i just ignore the sequels like they never happened and just enjoy the original and best cause remember there can be only one.

05-27-2002, 07:32 PM
Well you can blame Lambert for agreeing to be IN the sequels, but they weren`t his IDEA or anything.
As for 'why did they do it', who knows, apparently some studio execs thought "Highlander" would make a good movie franchise....I guess they just forgot about the "there can be only one" part!

05-27-2002, 07:33 PM
Yup studios are the bane of good movies.

05-27-2002, 08:11 PM
Highlander 10/10
The Quickining :rengade cut 5/10
Final Demension 6/10
Endgame 5/10

Some of the sequels are passible,watch the RV of Part 2.It was taken out of the director's hands.

3 is trying to be a decent part of the series,and its only drawback is van Peebles is trying to be the Kurgan from part 1.

I didnt like #4 as much. it seemed like an episode of the series.

Christopher Lambert is an underatted actor who got stuck in the action genre.He should fire his agent.

As for the proposed part 5? They should stop while they're ahead.

There can be only one!

05-27-2002, 08:47 PM
did u guys realise lambert was one of the favourites for bond but was pipped to the post by timothy dalton.now that i would have loved to see,can u imagine lambert saying the famous line the names bond james bond in his french accent.i think it would have been so cool.

05-29-2002, 06:03 PM
lets hear more

Lady Summerisle
05-30-2002, 01:38 AM
One word: MONEY

Jason Voorhees
05-30-2002, 03:33 AM
Originally posted by Lady Summerisle:
One word: MONEY.

Couldn't have said it better..

05-30-2002, 07:25 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by stevenscotland:
did u guys realise lambert was one of the favourites for bond but was pipped to the post by timothy dalton.now that i would have loved to see,can u imagine lambert saying the famous line the names bond james bond in his french accent.i think it would have been so cool.</font>

That would have been so cool.I'm sure Lambert would have gotten in the Highlander line somewhere.

In Goldeneye ,when trevlin falls to his death you hear "there can be only one".

06-06-2002, 02:36 PM
more replies please

06-06-2002, 04:09 PM
More replies? You have gotten the answer already - chaching! It's all about the bucks. Even the first one was about the money. They all are. Now if you were to ask how in the hell they could actually think the sequels would be worth a rats ass - I have no idea. You can't blame the actors - they get paid to act. That is like blaming the pizza delivery boy for putting too much cheese on your pizza. He did what 99.99% of Americans would do - took the cash. You should blame the people who owned the rights to the Highlander name and franchise - they are the ones who allowed it.

Absinte makes the heart grow fonder.....

06-06-2002, 05:18 PM
Lets just hope 20 years or so ,some jack-ass producer does not say Highlander remake,with Freddie prinze jr or some other jerk!

If they would make one more ,they should get Connery back and go all out,and get the 1st one's director: The very underatted Russell Mulcahy!

06-06-2002, 09:28 PM
well bulletproof thats what they did do with the second film and it was a mess

06-07-2002, 09:37 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by stevenscotland:
well bulletproof thats what they did do with the second film and it was a mess</font>

The Cut you're talking about is the one released in theaters in 1991.

Rent the Director's Renegade version of HL 2,and you will find a different movie.

06-07-2002, 08:04 PM
"Highlander" could have been a viable franchise, it could have been.

However, they went about it in entirely the wrong way. All they had to do to make a successful follow-up would be to set the movie in a time period BEFORE the original film. If they had followed up with a bunch of prequels they would not have to worry about the "there can be only one" part.

Instead, the producers, writers...whomever - decided to come up with more and more ways to re-write the ending of the first one and the "Highlander" timeline in general.

First there was "Highlander". Then there was "Highlander II: The Quickening" which ignored the first one. Then there was "Highlander III: The Sorcerer" which ignores the second and follows on from part one. Then there comes "Highlander: The Series" and "Highlander: The Raven" which ignored ALL the movies and set up their own timeline. Then comes "Highlander: Endgame" which follows on from the TV Series yet borrows bits and pieces from the movie timeline.

I liked the TV Series and "Endgame", charitably putting them into a "paralell universe" bracket.

With regards to a "Highlander 5":

In order to do it right set it in a time period before the original movie, that way it shouldn't conflict with any timeline except that of the second movie. And most "Highlander" fans won't care if they drop the Planet Zeist claptrap.

Don't bring back Christopher Lambert. He's one of my fave B Movie actors but he's run his course and is now too old to play Connor in ANY timeline. Adrian Paul on the other hand still has some mileage left in him.

If you're gonna do a proper prequel have some expository passages explaining the rules for newbies unfamiliar with any of the "Highlander" timelines. One of the main problems with "Endgame" was it's assumption that the audience was already familiar with the rules from the TV Show.

Personally though, I think "Highlander" as a franchise is dead. I think at this stage "Highlander"s handlers have milked the market dry with their crappy sequels.

06-07-2002, 08:11 PM
It would have been good if it wasn't for the whole "there can be only one" tagline. When there was only one left at the end of the first one the story got weak trying to find new ways around that big brick wall blocking the stories of new Highlander movies.

06-09-2002, 02:22 AM
ur not getting it ru.when u write a screenplay ur not thinking of making a whole bunch of movies ur thinking of making the best screenplay possible.thats what highlander was it was a perfect film.i cant fault anything from it,but it became a cult classic and just like werewolf in london and the hitcher it got more popular as the years went by.so pressure led to the sequel,they realised money could be made and instead of leaving a work of art alone they had to cover it with shit.as i said in my first letter i ignore all the highlander stuff after the first one,as far as im concerned connor mcleod lived out the rest of his life in scotland with his girlfriend from the first film.the end

The 13th Moderator
06-09-2002, 11:21 AM
I was watching Highlander: Endgame and it had no point at all. Every scene I watched had pointless violence. If they took their time, they could come out with a good script.