• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Movies that shouldn't have sequels, but do (and vice versa).

Taelorn76 said:
I would have loved to see a sequal to History of the world. I still laugh my a$$ off every time I watch it.
Yeah, unfortunatley Mel has abouot decided to do a Spaceballs prequel instead. Aside from Rick Moranas looking forward to a nice paycheck I can't picture anyone else looking forward to that one.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Personaly, I enjoyed the Matrix series, as well as T3. Now the second and third movies in the Matrix weren't fantastic, they were not bad. I think the death in production problems they had caused part of the problem, as they had to refilm and rush off to fix things to get the movie out there (Alieah or however you spell it (The evil queen in Queen of the Damned) was supposed to play the part Jadda Pinket Smith did, and the Oracle died mid-production as well.) And T3 was a fun movie, and apparently got James Cameron's approval as what he would have done with it as far as plot goes if he had done one.

Movies that should have sequals:
History of the World Part I
Flash Gordon (Preferably recast)
The Princes Bride (Sequal, Prequal, or even another movie in the same world/style)
2010 (I want to see 2063 and potentialy 3001 personaly)
Starsky & Hutch (Though I'd understand if that didn't happen)

Movies that didn't need sequals:
Speed
Universal Soldier (Though it's debatable if the first one should have been made, but there are 4, including one made with an entirely different cast)
The Crow
Most Single Star slasher movies (Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elmstreet, Halloween, it gets old)
Highlander (I don't even acknowledge the series, though that's more on a personal disagreement with the star of that show that I won't get into here)

I'm sure I'll think of more.

BTW, Coolest Sequal title: Breakin' 2: Electric Boogalo. Given us comedy ammo for years.
 

Silver Moon said:
Yeah, unfortunatley Mel has abouot decided to do a Spaceballs prequel instead. Aside from Rick Moranas looking forward to a nice paycheck I can't picture anyone else looking forward to that one.
I don't have a problem with a Spaceballs prequel. I think the original Spaceballs is hilarious, and own it on DVD.

My problem is that the days of Mel's best work, such as Young Frankenstein, Blazing Saddles, History of the World Part I, and Spaceballs are in the past. His more recent work, like Robin Hood: Men in Tights, and Dracula: Dead and Loving It leaves a lot to be desired. My fear is that Brooks' parody will take an ironic twist, in that the parody of the Star Wars prequels will go the way of the prequels themselves, serving as a lackluster follow-up to a great original.
 


Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
I also see that they're making an Underworld sequel. Now, while I'm sure that there are plenty of people on these forums that enjoyed the first Underworld: I was not one of them. The first one, IMO, was awful and I cannot imagine why anyone would want a second one. *shudder*

Totally agree. Underworld suuuuuuuuuuuuucked.
 

Another movie that probably shouldn't have had a sequel:

First Blood

The Rambo: First Blood part 2 changed was a pretty major turn-around from the original.
 

Mad Hatter said:
This does not preclude it from being a DnD movie. SO what if it had only two classes? There's still a party. And monsters might have been nice, but DnD isn't all about monsters. I personally like a good human villain in DnD games. Then everything isn't so black and white or whatever. 13th Warrior is a great DnD flick.
I think it kinda does so preclude it. Sure, you can have a D&D game like the 13th Warrior, but if you do, you're completely ignoring so many iconic D&Disms that there's no point in pretending that it's representative of D&D.
 


Joshua Dyal said:
I think it kinda does so preclude it. Sure, you can have a D&D game like the 13th Warrior, but if you do, you're completely ignoring so many iconic D&Disms that there's no point in pretending that it's representative of D&D.

But if my campaign is very like 13th warrior, does that mean it's not representative of D&D? Because it ignores so many iconic D&Disms?

Partly, deciding what is more or less D&Dish (especially compared to the abyssmal D&D movie) is in the eye of the beholder. Hawk the Slayer is a FAR more D&Dish movie as I see it because it's got cheesy action, bad overacting, and goofy inter-party banter. That's a better fit with most D&D campaigns I've played in than the D&D movie and thus, it's more D&Dish.
And if 13th Warrior fits that mold too, then it is as well.
 


Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top