Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 09:46:42 pm
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: Brian Fein is now blogging weekly!  Make sure to check the homepage for his latest editorial.
+  The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums
|-+  TDMMC Forums
| |-+  Off-Topic Board
| | |-+  The trend of ignoring sequels
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: The trend of ignoring sequels  (Read 1441 times)
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30395

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« on: August 13, 2018, 03:31:51 pm »

There are a rash of new movies coming out based on old properties.  They aren't reboots, yet they are sequels to earlier films that discount previous sequels to other films.

This is happening with Halloween -- a 2018 version that includes Jamie Lee Curtis only counts the first Halloween as canon.
A new Terminator movie is only counting T1 and 2, while discounting T3, Salvation, & Genesis
And a new Robocop may try to cast Peter Weller again, but to only serve as a direct sequel to the first one.

I don't know how I feel about this.  Of these franchises, I'm not super into the canon.  I do really like the first couple of Terminators, but am weary of just doing whatever in stories because you can undo it later.  ...seems kinda comic-booky in a way....reduces stakes.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
CF DolFan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 16870


cf_dolfan
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2018, 05:25:43 pm »

I'm not sure how it is any different than a reboot. I mean ... they are choosing to change whatever they do not see as a viable part of the story so they remove it and start back up where they feel necessary.

Personally I dislike the idea of a reboot but I take them on a case by case and some have turned out pretty good.
Logged

Getting offended by something you see on the internet is like choosing to step in dog shite instead of walking around it.
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30395

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2018, 09:38:35 am »

These terms are all kinda similar, but how I understand them:

A remake is when you do the same story again but start the canon over.  It's generally the same or similar narrative.  Like...they remade Willy Wonka, True Grit, Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

A reboot is for a series when you re-envision the property or you give a fresh start to new fans.  This may happen within current canon or establish new canon.  It's usually new stories/new setting/new tone, but with known characters. Batman Begins, Star Trek, Casino Royale, Rise of the PLanet of the Apes.

A legasequel is when you are essentially creating a new starting point that continues larger canon, but doing so using some of the original actors to pass the torch to new faces: Jurassic World, The Force Awakens, Creed, Terminator Genesis

This new trend is a little bit different.  It's within canon and it's a direct sequel to another story.  But it's one that discounts other elements of that canon.  I suppose it's possible to be more than one of these things.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2018, 09:49:10 am »

A reboot is for a series when you re-envision the property or you give a fresh start to new fans.  This may happen within current canon or establish new canon.  It's usually new stories/new setting/new tone, but with known characters. Batman Begins, Star Trek, Casino Royale, Rise of the PLanet of the Apes.

A legasequel is when you are essentially creating a new starting point that continues larger canon, but doing so using some of the original actors to pass the torch to new faces: Jurassic World, The Force Awakens, Creed, Terminator Genesis
Given that Abrams' Star Trek used an original actor (in his original role) to pass the torch, wouldn't it be the latter instead of the former?
Logged

Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15558



« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2018, 11:06:10 am »

In a series of movies where time travel is part of the canon, I think we should expect part of other story lines to disappear as part of the time travel interference.
Logged
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30395

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2018, 02:11:53 pm »

Given that Abrams' Star Trek used an original actor (in his original role) to pass the torch, wouldn't it be the latter instead of the former?

This falls under:
Quote
I suppose it's possible to be more than one of these things.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
DaLittle B
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1295


Do Simple better


Email
« Reply #6 on: August 15, 2018, 05:20:10 pm »

I generally don't have any interest in these type of movies...I did like the Star trek reboots,but I feel like those are more of exceptions...
Logged

BigDaddyFin
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 3538

watch me lose my mind, live and in full color.


« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2018, 08:23:18 am »

It depends on the reboot/sequel.  Some of them suck outright, some of them were actually pretty well done.
Logged

Hey... what's in the bowl bitch?
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

The Dolphins Make Me Cry - Copyright© 2008 - Designed and Marketed by Dave Gray


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines