#1  
Old 01-02-2012, 08:16 PM
Trilogies and multiple sequels

This may not be that awesome of a rant, as others may see it as pretty pointless and totally subjective, but I'll say it anyway just to see if there are others who feel this way.

I'm all for trilogies and multiple sequels but I've come to a conclusion I actually dislike it when a director locks full on to the films and dedicates the next 5 or so years instead of doing something else.

Examples of what I'm talking about.

Michael Bay and Transformers - this dude, while not exactly a fan favorite, unless you enjoy him as an action director (which is sort of the point here) - hasn't filmed anything else besides Transformers sequels after the original.

James Cameron and Avatar - I'm all love for Cameron, regardless what people think or say. But even after I saw Avatar and really enjoyed it, and I found out he attached himself to Avatar 2, and 3 - locking himself full on until they are made, and that is up until 2015/16. I really got disappointed.

David Fincher and The Girl with... films (aka Millenium Trilogy) - Ok, this is still up in the air although Sony confirmed that they are working on the sequel. Fincher may or may not return. However, if he does the sequels they're going to be back-to-back.

Now... Bay and Transformers - The only reason I would pay to see a Bay film is because as an action director, he succeeds in many levels to bring that to screen, in my view. However, I haven't seen any of the previous two sequels in the theater despite it having the stuff he's good at. I may not be a huge T-fan, and that's the reason why I just don't care to pay for it. The subject matter, or the characters never attracted me.

Cameron and Avatar - enjoyed this film in the theater, but besides the amazing world which no doubt was breathtaking, I didn't love the film. And when I found out he's doing Avatar 2 & 3, I sighed with slight disappointment. Yes, I'm aware nobody gives a shit about one sigh, when stacked up against a majority who loved Avatar and would love to see the sequels right away - money is what matters here, I'm sure.. despite what Cameron may say.

Fincher and Tattoo films (possibly, if he's gonna do 2, and 3) - Enjoyed his adaptation, no doubt - but - Fincher is just too damn awesome to get stuck on a trilogy. He's got so many interesting projects on his slate that I'd pay for any one of them on opening night. Although, if Fincher makes these sequels, at least he's going to be doing them back-to-back and we don't have to wait as long as 2015/16 to see them, as opposed to Cameron.

My issue - with an exception to Bay, both Cameron and Fincher, in my mind have interesting projects which they are circling, and have been for a few years, especially Cameron and Battle Angel. I'm becoming restless when I see them listed under "In Development (Hell)"

If only they at least did something in between the way Christopher Nolan has done it, two times already!

That is an awesome approach. It doesn't burn you out, you don't get tired of just the same thing, both as a filmmaker and a viewer. I just wish that after Avatar, Cameron has gone on to make Battle Angel, it's not like after Avatar people forget who he was, he wouldn't lose that steam and since it all revolves around $ - it would still make 'em.

Fincher has just too many interesting ones he could do right after Dragon Tattoo. Black Hole, The Reincarnation of Peter Proud just to name a few. With his mood and style he always brings us interesting films.

Just to make this complete, Bay was constantly talking about Pain and Gain and he should finally make it already.

I feel it gets tiring when filmmakers constantly crank out sequels without 'breathing room' in between, the way Nolan was capable of doing. And it isn't like Nolan was making smaller films in between either. So I'm wondering if it's just huge paychecks that clouded Bay's, Cameron's, (possibly Fincher's?) judgments.

They all have others films on their slate, so why not pursue them? They have leverage, and choice - they can easily get financing based on their names alone. What is it that attracts them so much to constantly being stuck in one world without in between films?

That's what my issue is.

Well, so yeah.

Last edited by Digifruitella; 01-02-2012 at 08:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-02-2012, 08:23 PM
Multiple sequel films I don't like are;

The Twilight Saga (shite)
POTC (yawn......)
Transformers (crap)
Paranormal Activity (4 of them)

Just sayin'
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-02-2012, 08:27 PM
I'm kind of glad that PERCY JACKSON AND THE OLYMPIANS doesn't fit this group. There are 5 books in the series. They only made one movie.

...even though I enjoyed watching it. What can I say? I'm a sucker for Greek Mythology. After watching it, I was geared up for the books.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-03-2012, 11:27 AM
I doesn't really bother me when directors work on nothing but a single franchise and its sequels. Bay doesn't do any other kind of movie but the over-the-top action movies and the Transformers franchise is perfect for him. Avatar, and its subsequent sequels, is Cameron's baby. It was his technological savvy that helped up the ante for the first and made it the spectacle it was.

Having said that, I do respect Nolan a little more for exploring other story ideas in between his Batman movies. Hell, the first time around he worked with the same stars - Bale and Caine in The Prestige - before going on to do The Dark Knight. Hell, he even tapped some of the stars of Inception to work in TDKR: Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon Levitt and Marion Cotillard (and Caine). While he departs from the franchise for a bit, he works with the same people and I think that allows him to give the flow and chemistry going.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Exophrine View Post
I'm kind of glad that PERCY JACKSON AND THE OLYMPIANS doesn't fit this group. There are 5 books in the series. They only made one movie.

...even though I enjoyed watching it. What can I say? I'm a sucker for Greek Mythology. After watching it, I was geared up for the books.
I believe they're working on the sequel now.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-03-2012, 02:52 PM
...hope it's good
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-03-2012, 03:17 PM
I agree. I think if these directors are going to make these franchises, they should go the Nolan route and make other films in between. With the case of Fincher, it's tough because Mara isn't going to be wanting to play that role eight years down the road. I think his strategy is good if he does indeed want to make the next two. Shooting those back-to-back will make him be available for 20,000 Leagues by 2014 probably.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-03-2012, 03:45 PM
Totally agree with your rant.

Cameron seems to only be interested in box office numbers. While I did enjoy seeing Avatar in IMAX 3D, I would like to see him go back to making hard R sci fi films (I actually made a rant regarding that awhile back).

As far as Fincher goes, I would hate for him to make two more of those Dragon Tattoo films. It would just seem like a waste of time.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-03-2012, 04:46 PM
Can't wait to see Paranormal Activity 4. I'm a fan of the franchise. I DO agree on some of the others though like POTC and Harry Potter.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-21-2012, 05:17 AM
I don't really mind this, because I don't follow directors themselves really, I just anticipate good/great movies, regardless of who is making them. I do think it makes sense in a way for them to stick to doing only that series until it's complete, if it's a guarantee that the sequels would be made. Maybe they want to put out all their energy into just that before moving on to something else.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-21-2012, 06:18 AM
"Avatar" was a projected trilogy from the get-go and obviously the English 'Millennium' trilogy was as well, so one can't really fault those. It's the stuff like "Pirates of the Caribbean" and "Transformers" that were initially made as one-off movies who only had sequels granted to them as a result of the success of the first installment that bother me more than anything.

I also don't like it when a series, after being a trilogy for years and years, suddenly sees a fourth installment get made. After years of development hell, I continue to hope "Mad Max 4" and "Jurassic Park IV" never happen. I guess it's mostly because the number 4 lacks the finality of 3 or 5 (after all how often does one make a Top 4 list of anything? ), so if you make a fourth installment you damn well better be prepared to make a fifth as well, I say (fortunately "Indiana Jones" appears to be heeding that advice).
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-23-2012, 05:20 AM
Well I would still prefer a bad boys 3 instead of another Transformers movie from Bay, which i do actually enjoy, even the 2nd one.

As far as the millenium trilogy, I do hope Fincher returns to direct the next 2 as I cannot see any other American filmmaker who can do this justice. Also these movies are meant to be part of a trilogy & not a cash grab like other sequels. Even if they don't perform well at the box office they still need to be made. I am very happy that Dragon Tattoo did end up making money & would love to see the other books made. Fincher's version was much more faithful than the Swedish versions. As far Rooney Mara & Daniel Craig they are already signed up for the sequels.

With Avatar it's easy because thats simply Cameron's vision & who else could capture them but him.

I don't mind sequels actually as long as they are entertaining & at least try to continue the story, franchises like POTC, Paranormal Activity & Alvin & the Chipmunks are clearly cash grabs.

Last edited by philalva77; 01-23-2012 at 05:25 AM.. Reason: added points
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-14-2012, 07:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by God of War View Post
Multiple sequel films I don't like are;

The Twilight Saga (shite)
POTC (yawn......)
Transformers (crap)
Paranormal Activity (4 of them)

Just sayin'
It wouldn't be paranormal if it happened so many times. It should be paranormal the first two, and then normal for all the rest.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-09-2012, 08:18 PM
Lord of the Rings, Matrix, the original X-Men were all great trilogies.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump