Sequels this year

[monkie_fart69]

How come there is all these 2's this year? I mean come on, X-2*, Spider Man 2, Charlies Anglels 2 and so many more
things, if they make a two it should be about a better movie, like Old School, or something. <*X2 was an awesome
movie I don't meen to dis it.

[Ryall]

Uh, typically, the first sequel of a movie has a 2 in it so you can realize that it's a sequel and not something different altogether. Like, say, if they'd made Tomb Raider and then called the sequel More Poorly Written Trash With a Push-Up Bra, people might not be clear on exactly whether or not that's a sequel to Tomb Raider. I think movies should do what people do and call the next one "Junior."

Of course, the bigger issue isn't sequels that have a "2" in the title, it's the ones that have TWO "2"s in the title. "2 FAST 2 FURIOUS"? What number sequel is that, exactly?

You also get into some odd places like when RAMBO III came out. There was no RAMBO II -- it was RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART II. So, technically, RAMBO III should have been called RAMBO II: FIRST BLOOD III. But that just uses to many "I"s on the marquee and doesn't leave any for other sequels so...

Wait, what were you saying? Something about liking X2, I think.

[Denyse]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
"2 FAST 2 FURIOUS"? What number sequel is that, exactly?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm...1.5???

[DangerSeeker]

I still remember the old rumors for Spaceballs 3: The Search for Spaceballs 2

[bartleby]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
There was no RAMBO II -- it was RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART II. So, technically, RAMBO III should have been called RAMBO II: FIRST BLOOD III.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure it shouldn't have been RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART II 2 or RAMBO: SECOND BLOOD PART II or 2 RAMBO 2 BLOOD or maybe RAMBO: LOOK WHO'S SHOOTING NOW?

[Thunderbird1]

Shouldn't it have been RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART III?

[Omaru]

I prefer sequals to just gain one chronological number, its much more simplified that way so we can have
Film , film 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on, or in roman numerics
its when u get to films that just have a weird title that confuse, like dude wheres my car followed by Seriously, dude wheres my car.
Or Friday, next friday, the friday after next friday. see how confusing it gets?

[Thunderbird1]

I agree.

Don't you think roman numerals give a film title a touch of class rather than just numbers?

[Tongue]

I do like the fact that the Madness of King George was originally called the Madness of George IV but they thought the Americans wouldn't watch it till they had seen the previous 3 films.

[Tuskinashi]

Spider-man two will be called The Amazing Spider-man. The first X-men was called X-men. The second is called X2: X-men United. So that isn't a 2. The Charlie's Angels one is true.. but who gives a crap about that flick?

A lot of sequels are coming out this year because they come out every year. People never realize that there are tons of new movies out there, just the sequels are the ones that catch your attention first. This is for a reason. Chances are you are more interested in seeing a sequel to a movie you loved(Matrix Reloaded for me) instead of a new flick that promises to be tip toppity(The Hulk for me again).

[DangerSeeker]

I dont know about the King George thing. I mean, I'm watching Shark Attack 3, and I hadnt seen the first 2. Probably won't...

[Thunderbird1]

The King George thing is an urban legend. The play that it was based on was called The Madness of George III and it was felt that they needed to get the word "King" into the title of the movie. A full explaination can be found here.

http://www.snopes.com/movies/films/george.htm

Thuderbird 1 - Here to educate as well as entertain. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

[Tongue]

I had already seen that site b4 but the thing you have to remember is that with every legend there is a basis of truth.

[Thunderbird1]

Not always, sometimes good stories can become legends. The legend of King Arthur for example or that crop circles are made by aliens is another good one.

[DangerSeeker]

I meant I doubted people wold skip a sequel because they hadn't seen the original. Also, I was making a joke.

Not every urban legend is somehow based on truth. Many of them are exactl the opposite, a popular and easily believable explination or story that was either made up as a gag, somebody trying to explain something they couldn't, or a mistake.

[Omaru]

Dangerseeker, oh for sure, I watched blade and due to my wandering mind I got lost withink about 30 mins of it and ended up just turning off the vcr, then I watched blade 2 and somehow sat through all that and understood everything, not that there was much to get in that one.

[Thunderbird1]

DangerSeeker, my post was actually a reply to Tonque's post (I really should learn how to use this board before I start posting!).

As a matter of fact, the first Lethal Weapon film I saw was 3 and then watched the others from the beginning, so I take your point that it wouldn't have made much difference if they'd left the title as the original play.

[DangerSeeker]

Actually, I was replying to him too. My work computer has a posessed mouse. It randomly scrolls, shoots sideways, so on, so often I just click at the closest link rather than deal. Muh bad. I'd post from home more, but I'm usually watching movies.

Here's a thought: Sequels that don't require seeing the first have numbers, like we're pointing out, but then there are sequels that take a different name where seeing the first IS required, like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars. Sure, we all know the order, but say some alien came down and thought "The Empire Strikes Back" looked interesting. No number, probably shelved under "E." THey'd be so lost.

[Thunderbird1]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Originally posted by DangerSeeker
I'd post from home more, but I'm usually watching movies.

[/ QUOTE ] Good man! Oh if only I had the time to watch more movies... /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

What about the Mr Smiths movies as well? They're not technically sequals but it helps to see them in order. A good point well made by you, me thinks. Although all the films you mention have the original films name in the title somewhere don't they? Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back and so on, so you would have a fair idea of which group (can't think of the posh word for it, sorry) of films they are part of but not where to start watching them from. It makes sense to us know, because we're waiting for the next one to come out. Matrix is another case in point, The Matrix, The Matrix Reloaded, The Matrix Revolutions. You could probably have an educated guess on where to start though.

Hmm. Intersting. Definatly needs some more thought.

[DangerSeeker]

True, they do have the whole name, so it helps, but yeah, Return of the King would sound more like a part two, and Fellowship of the Ring like a part three, if I didn't know better. Also, How many people saw the Color of Money, but had never seen or even heard of The Hustler? Depends on the sequel, I guess.

[Comicgirl1972]

Oh sequels aren't so bad. What would we do with out say Childs Play 2 or Holloween part 37763748505433 <font color="pink"> </font color>