Movies you cant believe got sequels or became trilogies

[Güicho]

The sequel to:

Return of the Jedi. LOL!

I mean, I can believe why they did it (no $urprise there), and that it's now it's own trilogy.
Just after the fact, what they did, wish they hadn't.
Luke's story arc was told, starts off young reckless, impulsive, first fails in the cave, then rushes to face his fear, and fails absolutely, both mentally and physically loses the hand so he never forgets his failure.
And symbolically replaces it. ...to what ends?
He comes back, and instead of following Jedi dogma, and the push to kill his own father, and bury the fear that courses through him, what his vision revealed.
He chooses a different path, his own path, and reinvents himself on the way as something new.
Now symbolically dressed in black, he recognizes his worst fear, sees both sides (in his father) as part of himself, unafraid of it, chooses not to kill it.
And instead tosses aside his saber. This single action not only defines and saves him, but finally shows his fallen father the path the redemption.

So what does this character defined by this story arc, this knowledge, and choice, supposedly do and become, when faced with that again?
The exact opposite of everything he learned.

What does he have to teach a young new Jedi? Nothing!....tosses his "past", he's apparently a complete failure LOL!, Who for "surprise character subversion" now does and is the exact opposite of everything he learned and became.
LOL!
Is this character growth? Or character assassination?

I love passing the legacy story(it's what I imagined for him) but that they felt they had to undo and betray everything about the character and what he'd become, turn him into a sniveling, hiding, piece of **** coward, now trapped and controlled by his fear (which he never was), trapped and a slave to Jedi dogma (which he never followed), and obsessed with books (which he never needed), and whose instinct is now the exact opposite if everything he did, was, learned, and become.

This sequel really took a giant dump on his character. All just to tell their "new" rehash story.

[Lee Stone]

Return of the Jedi. LOL!

I mean, I can believe why they did it (no $urprise there), and that it's now it's own trilogy.
Just after the fact, what they did, wish they hadn't.
Luke's story arc was told, starts off young reckless, impulsive, first fails in the cave, then rushes to face his fear, and fails absolutely, both mentally and physically loses the hand so he never forgets his failure.
And symbolically replaces it.
He comes back, and instead of following Jedi dogma, and the push to kill his own father, and bury the fear that courses through him, what his vision revealed.
He chooses a different path, his own path, and reinvents himself as something new.
He recognizes his worst fear, sees both sides (in his father) as part of himself, unafraid of it, chooses not to kill it.
And instead tosses aside his saber. This single action not only saves him, but finally shows his fallen father the path the redemption.

So what does this character with this story arc and knowledge supposedly become, when faced with that again? What does he have to teach a young new Jedi? The opposite!....he's a complete failure, who for "surprise character subversion" now does and is the exact opposite of everything he learned and became.
LOL!
Is this character growth? Or character assassination?

I love passing the legacy story(it's what I imagined for him) but that they felt they had to undo and betray everything about the character and what he'd become, turn him into a sniveling, hiding, piece of **** coward, now trapped and controlled by fear, trapped and a slave to Jedi dogma, and books he never once followed, and whose instinct is now the exact opposite if everything he'd become?
It really took a giant dump on his character and who he was. All just to tell their "new" rehash story.

I remember when I was a kid and the local newspaper had an article about the work on Return of the Jedi, with pics from the desert set.
And in the article they mentioned Lucas having plans of doing six other films.
But then I never heard anything else about them for years. Until Phantom Menace was announced.

[ChrisIII]

Jaws, The Ring, and Jurassic Park

The original films were all incredible films and did not need any sequels.

To be fair, Spielberg does kind of set up for a sequel with the aerosal can, although none of the sequels did follow up on it with the exception of a video game.


Funny thing is, the original Jurassic Park novel ended with a different ending, the island was destroyed but several Dinosaurs have made it onto the mainland as stowaways. Crichton didn't really follow up on that cliffhanger either (There's a beached Dino corpse that washes up but that's as close as it gets), instead bringing people to another island (and spielberg followed suit), although the concept of Dinosaurs escaping was used in the movie version of TLW and of course "Fallen Kingdom" opened the floodgates on that one.

[MyriVerse]

Highlander. The first had a solid ending and was very unsuccessful at the box office (rentals, I know). They should have stopped, and the TV series should be totally unrelated canonically.

Blues Brothers, Caddyshack, The Sting, Saturday Night Fever, Donnie Darko, Love Story... Just WHY?!

But I'm still waiting for History of the World II, Buckaroo Banzai vs the World Crime League, Remo Williams, Flash Gordon, and Big Trouble in Little China DAMMIT!

Wouldn't even mind a Doctor Detroit sequel rather than those above.

[Güicho]

Buckaroo Banzai vs the World Crime League,

Wasn't Kevin Smith going to relaunch this? What became of it?

[luprki]

First off, NOT asking about direct to video/DVD stuff (the list would then be never ending), but actual theatrical releases.

What got me thinking was seeing LONDON HAS FALLEN playing as i channel surfed today.

Don’t get me wrong, I liked the first movie, but thought WHITE HOUSE DOWN was way more fun, and thought for sure, of the two, IT would get a sequel.
Never happened.
But we’re on our third FALLEN movie.
I mean, i’ve never heard anyone online or IRL rave about these movies. I actually saw a lot of negative chat on the second installment.
So, are these movies really inexpensive to make? Does someone owe Gerard Butler a favor? I dunno, but yeah, i’m definitely surprised this became a trilogy.

I’m surprise these Fallen movies has gotten three movies and all are bad.
White House Down was a much better movie and should have gotten the sequels instead.

[AndrewCrossett]

But I'm still waiting for History of the World II,

One of the things I love about Mel Brooks... he never made a sequel to anything.

[ChrisIII]

Highlander. The first had a solid ending and was very unsuccessful at the box office (rentals, I know). They should have stopped, and the TV series should be totally unrelated canonically.

There could've been some potential with Mcloed's various other adventures over the centuries, or Ramirez's, as prequels (I think some of the spinoff material-not the movies/TV but stuff like comics have used this concept), but yeah, beyond the first one's happy ending was a pretty bad idea.

[ChrisIII]

The sequel to:

Return of the Jedi. LOL!

I mean, I can believe why they did it (no $urprise there), and that it's now it's own trilogy.
Just after the fact, what they did, wish they hadn't.
Luke's story arc was told, starts off young reckless, impulsive, first fails in the cave, then rushes to face his fear, and fails absolutely, both mentally and physically loses the hand so he never forgets his failure.
And symbolically replaces it.
He comes back, and instead of following Jedi dogma, and the push to kill his own father, and bury the fear that courses through him, what his vision revealed.
He chooses a different path, his own path, and reinvents himself as something new.
He recognizes his worst fear, sees both sides (in his father) as part of himself, unafraid of it, chooses not to kill it.
And instead tosses aside his saber. This single action not only defines and saves him, but finally shows his fallen father the path the redemption.

So what does this character defined by this story arc and knowledge supposedly become, when faced with that again? What does he have to teach a young new Jedi? The opposite!....he's a complete failure, who for "surprise character subversion" now does and is the exact opposite of everything he learned and became.
LOL!
Is this character growth? Or character assassination?

I love passing the legacy story(it's what I imagined for him) but that they felt they had to undo and betray everything about the character and what he'd become, turn him into a sniveling, hiding, piece of **** coward, now trapped and controlled by fear, trapped and a slave to Jedi dogma, and books he never once followed, and whose instinct is now the exact opposite if everything he'd learned, and become?
It really took a giant dump on his character and who he was. All just to tell their "new" rehash story.

You might find the old Expanded Universe to your liking; it pretty much features Luke as largely the same guy from ROTJ. He has his bad moments (He falls to the Dark side briefly, for example) but manages to rebuild the Jedi Order (with some changes ,like allowing marriage for example). The Jedi Order largely does get eliminated again (In the Legacy comics), but it's a century later and not really his fault.

[Güicho]

You might find the old Expanded Universe to your liking; it pretty much features Luke as largely the same guy from ROTJ. He has his bad moments (He falls to the Dark side briefly, for example) but manages to rebuild the Jedi Order (with some changes ,like allowing marriage for example). The Jedi Order largely does get eliminated again (In the Legacy comics), but it's a century later and not really his fault.

They were just ok, highlight was Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy, featured a well developed new villain and world building in Thrawn (definitely better than Snoke) .
And yes in the Dark Horse followup, I liked Luke exploring his Dark Side (exploring that side of himself this balance is actually a fundamental part of the character, he chose to wear black for a reason), through their Dark Empire saga.
These were however, just ok, I thought a movie in the right hands could deliver further, and better.

That's why I was really looking forward to the reboot and new trilogy, I had no problem branching away from the old Expanded U (Legends U).
Loved the intro of Rey, her character, and Finn & Poe (and some aspects of Ren, depends where he lands).
Like I said, I wanted to see a passing of the legacy (it's what Luke would seek out and do), and Rey is an absolute great character for it, I cheered when that saber flew into her hands!
Really fantastic! The image of Rey's reflection infinitely looking back at herself, was a brilliant visual. That's all she's going to see looking back is her is herself, ultimately it doesn't mater who your parents were, where you came from, princess or slave, ultimately like Anakin, like Luke, it's your choices that mater and define you, nothing else.
And I'm curious where Ren falls in all this?
I explained pretty specifically what I didn't like, and where they absolutely betrayed the core of what was once Luke's character and instinct.

I remember those pre-release awkward interviews with Hamill, where he'd repeat "he fundamentally disagreed with virtually everything they decided about his character" and thinking what a weird thing to say about an upcoming movie you are in, he's just kidding around and being eccentric, but nobody would ever react or laugh or comment back to what he said. It was all just awkward silence and creepy grins from Kennedy and Johnson.
I actually had no idea how serious he was being. LOL!

[MyriVerse]

One of the things I love about Mel Brooks... he never made a sequel to anything.

History of the World was different in that it's nothing but a string of vignettes. I'd love a tv series of it.

[Nine Crocodile]

Starship Troopers. The original really didn't profit that much.

[Jim Kelly]

The Purge. Like, one movie is enough to get how this world works.

On the other side of the same Ethan Hawke, Before Sunrise/Sunset/Midnight is a pleasant candidate for this topic. Can't believe we got a sequel, but glad that it became a trilogy.

The first PURGE had a very low budget (single location shoot and Hawke did the movie as a favour to Jason Blum) and it made a ton of money relative to its budget. It may have had low stakes, but it was a proof of concept for them to make bigger budget movies. I think that ELECTION DAY was the better movie, so it's good they re-invested their profits to develp the concept further.

I love BEFORE SUNRISE--sharing a birthday with Richard Linklater, it's weird how his experiences and mine often match--and I've been very happy with the sequels.

Not long ago I watched all the Pitch Perfect movies in one go--and I just don't understand what people see in them. It's like the film makers saw how they could make a great movie with these elements and then went out of their way to make a lesser movie each time. The characters that kept me interested were not the stars but Anna Camp and Brittany Snow (I always feel like their story would be much more worthwhile to follow). The actors that drive me up a wall are Rebel Wilson and Adam DeVine--I can't understand why anyone bothers with them, they're annoying as hell. Anna Kendrick is good but wasted in her role. And the premise of a capella singing is up my alley, yet it's never really a capella singing and rather canned over-produced looped in singing. These would be good, if the performers were actually being recorded live in the scene (but maybe some of the actors aren't capable of that performance without autotune).

[LordLeviathan]

Wasn't Kevin Smith going to relaunch this? What became of it?

from what I know and understand the right ownership is a mess

[j9ac9k]

I can't believe they made 13 "Ocean's" movies... (that's actually my wife's joke, but it's appropriate here)