Awful Sequels. Whats going on?

Question

After seeing the following films over the last 3/4 weeks, I have come to the conclusion that Hollywood has finally run out of ideas. They were terrible. What do you all think?



Spiderman 3: - Shocking, 2/10,

POTC 3: - Ok, 5/10

Shrek 3: - An exceptionally sub-standard piece of work 3/10

SAW 3: - Storyline was quite clever but acting stunk 6/10

Oceans 13: - Best of a Bad bunch 7/10


All I hope is Die Hard and The Jason Bourne are improvements, on this years dribble!!

Answer 1

All movies since 2004 suck.

Good thing i dont watch TV anymore.

Answer 2

Hello :) hope you are well! Ooh I reckon there's been a few. From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money * Creepshow 3 * 30 Days of Night: Dark Days The Hills Have Eyes 2 (remake) The Butterfly Effect 2 They're all movies I enjoyed the original for. Creepshow had two original movies, but the 3rd was made by different people, very shoddy and just cashing in on the name. I put * by the movies that were sequels for stuff I really loved. Edit: Hey Logan, yes there was! Load of rubbish though, George A Romero and Stephen King didn't make it, it was literally just a movie which nicked the name! It did have the separate stories element, but that's where the similarities ended. Apparently they're making a Creepshow 4 at the moment....goodness no! That was something only the 80's could get away with :)

Answer 3

This is what often happens when a film becomes a franchise. The filmmakers come to the conclusion that people will be eager enough to see the movie simply because of what has come before in the series, so they don't put in the effort to add originality or quality, they just toss the familiar characters on the screen. Now that the opening weekend is the only thing people look at, this strategy works, as people will flock to see the movie, even if the reviews aren't strong. But while people would go back to the earlier films for repeat viewings, there is nothing in these 3's to bring people back.

Answer 4

I thought Spiderman 3 was funny, in a bad way. You know that but with the Butler and he says that he loved Harry and his father, everyone laughed at that part!
I thought POTC 3 was ok, but it was too long and the ending sucked. Oh and the whole "I think Elizabeth is Calypso thing' sucked as well.
I haven't see Shrek 3, but I've heard that it's bad.
I'm not allowed to see Saw 3.

Answer 5

Die Hard rules. But I agree with you, I hated all of those movies except for Spider Man 3 and I kinda liked POTC 3.

Answer 6

It's time for the studios to stop trying to make every film a "franchise"- shudder. See the film "Evening" -it is full of some of our best film actors. There will always be a battle in Hollywood between commerce and art but if we are tired of sequels we need to quit buying tickets.

Answer 7

Yes it is very uninspiring, I simply couldn't muster the interest to see POTC and Shrek 3. Spiderman 3 was very very boring as well.

Please keep faith and turn your attention to "indie" movies.

City Of God, The Station Master and Garden State are excellent examples.

Answer 8

Of those, I only have watched Saw 3 and Ocean's 13.They aren't bad.
But, the sequels are always worse then the originals.

Answer 9

Die Hard 4 was alot of fun...Bruce Willis never takes himself too serious and it shows in his films....just a lot of entertainment and not to stressing on the intellect

Pirates sucked...good effects...terrible story line

Saw sucked big time...how many different ways can you horribly kill someone

Oceans 13 ...well I like to watch hunky men...period...lol

Answer 10

The only ones out of any of those movies l like is Shrek and Saw. l don't like any of the other originals, so l never watched the sequels!

Answer 11

Don't forget the abundance of crappy remakes and then there's the new Indiana Jones movie. Forget Hollywood altogether.