9.06.2011

Give it a rest already!

I swear every other day I read somewhere on some website that some classic movie from the 80's is getting a sequel, prequel, or remake/reboot. Or if it's not a movie, it's some old t.v. series that is getting its own movie. Hollywood studios sure are desperate these days. From Ghostbusters to Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, Goonies, and Ferris Bueller's Day Off...apparently no story should ever end and no movie universe is off limits to revisiting right? Basically, it seems like a whole bunch of fan-fiction writers have invaded Hollywood!

Sure you can revisit any story. But that doesn't mean you should. It's like all the sequels they make to classic literature. The author intended their story that they created from their own head to end a certain way...so who are you to come in and not only change the story..but to also capitalize off of it? Who needs a sequel to Pride & Prejudice, Wuthering Heights and Gone With The Wind when they were classics anyway? But apparently there's always some wannabe author who feels the need re-visit classic characters and make them re-learn all the lessons they learned....or give them second chances because they didn't agree with the author's choices.

I mean...it doesn't exactly taint the original...but in a way it kind of does... but just as a small afterthought. "Man that was such a great story....and then there was that crappy sequel....boy was that ridiculous." Still....some editions do work. Who would have known that the prequels to X-Men and Planet of the Apes would be among the best movies of the summer? But honestly....who has been craving a Beetlejuice sequel? Yes, that's the one I read today that prompted me to write this blog. Oh and also I gotta mention the made-for-t.v. sequels while I'm on this subject. Mean Girls, A Cinderella Story, The Cutting Edge? When does it end?? So what to you is completely off limits for sequels, prequels, and remakes? And, are there any years later sequels/prequels that you think were worth it?

7 comments:

Joey said...

t for everyone successful "The Fugitive" there are 50 other tv shows that didn't make good movies. "Beverly Hills" anyone?

And it is funny because there are some characters that I wanted to know more about, but I have yet to see a sequel or prequel that answered those questions if they weren't written by the original creator.

Tough calls because sometimes lightening does strike twice....just not often.

seanmackay.net said...

I thought the Aladdin sequels were pretty awesome, as well as the prequel to Dumb and Dumber. I always wanted to know about Harry and Lloyd's friendship origin.

Sarah said...

No way. Are you kidding? Is someone out there really trying to make a Beetlejuice sequel? That's just wrong.

As for Bill and Ted's, I don't know, I really love those movies, so I might find it amusing. But I can't imagine that it would be that great either.

They shouldn't try to mess with Goonies. The magic of that movie is the comradery between the kids. That couldn't be recreated with the actors now as adults. And it couldn't be recreated with a new group of kids.

The bad thing about the Ghostbusters reboot is that they are doing it with the intention of getting a new group of Ghostbusters so that they can carry on the franchise...but without the actors that made Ghostbusters so great. Bad idea.

You're right about Hollywood and the recycled idea. I think they just want to make money and things that are familiar to viewers tend to sell better. And perhaps they are hoping for the curiosity factor to bring in audiences as well. For instance, they are trying to cast a reboot of Dirty Dancing. I'll bet a ton of older gals show up to find out who could replace Patrick Swayze and if anyone would still dare to put Baby in a corner. Then, of course, younger gals will show up to watch a hot young guy dance with a girl like them.

The funny thing is that when a reader wants to change a storyline, character, or just stretch it out, they very rarely do it in the same way as another reader. I think that's why authors leave some things unanswered. Because they want to prompt the reader to come up with something for themselves in their own mind. But it's just WRONG to try and force your version of a story on others.

I watched the made for TV Gone With the Wind Sequel out of pure curiosity and it was AWFUL! So bad that you couldn't look away. Gone With the Wind has a lot of drama, but it was never a soap opera. The sequel was so soap opera that the suds fairly oozed out of the screen.

The sequels that made me REALLY mad though were the sequels to Anne of Green Gables. The thing that made me the maddest is that L.M. Montgomery actually laid out Anne's history. You know everything about Anne from the time she is twelve until she is in her fifties. She wrote something like 7 or 8 books about Anne and then she is also featured in other books about Avonlea where she isn't central to the storyline.

And then they go and blow it by making awful sequels that mess with the timeline of her life, how many children she had, when she got married to Gilbert, when Gilbert died, etc. Ewwww!

The second Anne movie was forgivable because while it stripped Anne of her college degree and her campus days with Gilbert and her gal pals, it at least pulled elements from the other books (in the books, Anne is engaged to Gilbert when she teaches the Pringles at that school. He is off at med school).

The third Anne of Green Gables movie was bad news. Rather than having Anne's grown children serve in WWI, they somehow stretch out Anne and Gilbert's engagement over the course of more than a decade and they don't even get married until right before WWI. How in the world do they explain that time lapse? Oh, right, they don't. They just glossed over it. Then, after finally falling in love with and marrying Gilbert, Anne has thoughts of straying...and for some no good louse?! Sacrilege!

The fourth (and hopefully, final) Anne sequel must have figured that they had already messed with the story so much that it didn't matter if they did a little more messing. So much so, that they figuratively messed their pants because that movie is a piece of crap. Among other things, it turns out that Anne really isn't an orphan at all. Only her mom died. Her dad was just a jerk, so she lied to everyone and told them that he was dead. So, basically, everything we ever knew about Anne was a lie because she lied about being an orphan to begin with! That movie is all about her trying to search out her newly discovered half brother. Puke.

Sarah said...

Oh, and ha ha! Did you ever see Splash Too!? Pure evil!

Any sequel that can't bring back the original actors to play the characters should reconsider making the movie at all. (Hint: if you can't get the original actor, it shouldn't be done). In fact, that is the one glaring error in the Back to the Future trilogy. Though I read that Claudia Wilson (the original Jennifer) couldn't participate in the sequels because her mother was dying of cancer. So, I can't fault her there. And in that case, it was better that they made the sequels even if they had to recast the role (this was made easier because it was a smaller role).

Emily said...

Plus it was a shame there was no George McFly in the sequels too. But wow I never knew they made a 4th Anne movie. That sounds awful.

Laurie & Clint said...

Sarah's comment is longer than your blog. And I agree on all points afe
afore mentioned

Emily said...

Hahaha you're right. That's funny.