Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zeke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kira
Not that it really matters -- odds are excellent that this film is going to suck. Hard. Just like its two predecessors. (And unlike Batman Begins, Zeke.)
|
Hey, I'll be delighted if it doesn't suck -- I'm just saying the recent history isn't promising. But I've been wrong before. I wasn't optimistic about Spider-Man 2, which turned out to be the best thing ever. |
Ah, but
Batman Begins will contain people that can actually
act, a department lacking good representation in
Spiderman 2 (which, granted, was better than I expected given the first one and the "actors") . The buzz is that they've finally gotten Batman right this time around -- and with Michael Caine as Alfred, how can it possibly go wrong? Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman... need I go on? The
teaser trailer is already available and it looks sweet.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zeke
Tangent: Why must all movies have sequels?
|
Because Hollywood, as a collective consciousness, has the IQ of a kumquat. If Movie X makes a few billion, then X 2 will make even more. (No, not
X2.
X2 is a standard that a lot of sequels would do well to be coming within reaching distance of.) Original ideas are sadly few and far between. Sequels are only justifiable when a sequel makes sense -- in the case of adapted books (see: the
Bourne movies,
Lord of the Rings, and the
upcoming Narnia movies), or when the plot obviously demands a follow up.
Matrix? Not one of those. Ditto for
Shrek, but I'm willing to let that one slide in light of nearly hyperventilating while watching it.