Imagine just a drama about the guy that escapes having surviver guilt saying why did I survive not them. Would also be a good way to bring the monster's back ptsd she keeps seeing it everywhere and having nightmares.

Write it down... your career awaits.

Ash vs Evil Dead?

Aliens kinda did that. Ripley goes to the colony to prove that xenomorphs are real and she's not a crazy lady who blew up a million $ spaceship for nothing.

@@horacelidenbrock3905 no they all thought he did it but they didn't have it set as purely a legal drama. I was very clear.

Hahaha! That shit got me on tears!

Bruce: _”Don’t underestimate my POWER!!!”_

Also, the poor sharks are often eaten by Mainland Chinese government officials as well. Shark fin soup = dead soulless cartilage.

Brody: ”You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the villains, not join them! To bring balance to the ecosystem, not leave it in darkness!”

@@Dinoslay Ellen Brody: “Don’t do it! I have the high ground!”

Nor would they want to.

Who says the shark did not mutate?

When a shark jumps the shark

I always assumed the shark had eaten a Lion off-screen and it was still fighting to get out.

@@plipogamez3173 That could explain why it exploded when it was impaled on the boat's bow sprit

Yes, I have heard that sharks make terrible dinner guests because of the gas.

I had always just assumed that it was somehow because of Michael Caine being in the boat. That man is an amazing actor.

Shark repellent bat spray works wonders against exploding sharks.

True. They have a diet similar to Jordan Peterson. All meat, no vegetables. That's why they are depressed, i guess.

Sounds like a python skit

And then you get shit on for pointing this out.

That'd be the Hiptang

What are next

@@jamesalexhowlett because it’s a circle jerk of pseudo-intellectuals who think they’re above the common person for not liking films that anyone who understands even the basics of film criticism don’t like.

This is such a dumb response, audiences have shown time and time again that bad sequels are unwanted. Jaws, The Sting 2, DCU movies, Superman 4 and Batman & Robin. All those franchises died because audiences and critics didn't like the movies.

You just blew my mind.

I'm not sure the creative process is the same for both, but they do tend to go wrong for the same reasons.

The need to properly understand the original work is the same, but creating a sequel goes beyond adapting material that's already been written for you - it requires you invent new material to extend someone else's story. The main problem with most sequels is that they're motivated by the studio's desire to replicate a success - to give people more of what they liked - so a sequel is mandated regardless of whether there was anything left to say, story-wise. Often, the original writer wants nothing to do with a sequel because as far as they're concerned the original story was complete in itself and already reached its natural conclusion. The words "Based on characters created by" are a warning that you're headed into the pastiche zone...

100% right.

Jay Courtney: 99 percent abs, 1 percent charisma.

It's not gyms and protein meals. It's human flesh from dead soldiers and running for your life from killer robots. That's why everyone in post-apocalyptic futures is so buff.

This remember me Fist of North Star were evebody is a massive bodybuilder in a post apocalipt world.

@@qty1315 you wouldn't be buff, you'd be lean

Perfect

You refer to the prophecy of the one who will bring balance to the seas. You believe it’s this… buoy?

@@TokyoXtreme “well... from a certain point of seaview”

AHOY THERE

@@MrParkerman6 In some countries it's title was, in fact, "Rambo".

@@MrParkerman6 And Rambo 2 is officially named: Rambo: First Blood Part II :D

@@BenJamin-en3jb Then the fourth film in 2008 was just called Rambo...

Rambo 4 was actually decent....it was everything ramblings wasn't supposed to be, gore, grounded and not an 80's action flick.

In the last movie, Rambo himself didn't know who he was.

Oh I do hope this is true.

Did one of the original reviews say: "In the original you always felt like you're sitting on dynamite?"

When I read bleeding shark I assumed you were going to say the mpaa git involved but no, this is even dumber than I could've possibly imagined

Oddly enough, that is exactly how "Jaws" for the NES ends. Shark is pierced, shark sinks. Roll credits.

@@Bluesit32 That's how the book ends. The shark is approaching to eat Chief Brodey when it suddenly dies from exhaustion and its many wounds and sinks into the depths. Pretty anticlimactic really

Is this about rogue 1 lmao

@@alexarias5717 Works for Solo too

@@alexarias5717 Rogue One was such a waste of talent.

@@115117legit I think you're mistaking thow-away lines for world building.

I'll be back.

Why?

@@opkb4e watch the movie

@@opkb4e Women. Am I right? /s

The 7th Sense was a waste of time. I telepathically move dead vegetables didn't work.

@@enriquecabrera2137 I have.

Hard to tell- he looked different because his face was a biscuit (like a Hobnob but with jam inside like a Jaffa Cake)

@@JoeBleasdaleReal Oaty?

@@sprobablycancr4457 No, it's just the cut of his trousers.

Once I had a dream that Hugh Jackman pissed on the floor but it's fine, I doubt I'll ever meet him

@@adamheywood113 Did it smell like sugar puffs?

Yeah, but it won’t be as good. In fact, I am going to make a video telling people to ONLY watch part one! No sequels even exist!

Well played.

Will he expand upon what made this video great or just rehash it and do homage and pastiche?

nice onde dude

Yeah, Police Academy went on for a long time, mutating as it went to appeal to the largest demographics. They tried to do the same thing with Caddyshack, but the first sequel stunk so bad it killed the idea of a series. Somehow the Police Academy movies managed to be bad enough that no one cared if they were great, but not so bad that people would get disgusted and stop watching new ones.

carry on did the same thing actually. from a nostalgic war comedy with a couple of camp characters to full on self parody over the course of 268 films

268? Wikipedia says there were 31, plus 17 TV episodes and 3 stage plays. That's probably enough to qualify for longest movie series, though.

@@Kevin_Street it was an aproximation.

@douglas winward So in agreement about Diehard. That movie was awesome because despite being a cop, he was just a regular guy facing off alone against international criminals. Making him a super hero spy cop or whatever is exactly opposite of why it was cool in the first place.

Exactly. I actually guessed the twist from the trailer and still adored the film.

This brings up an interesting fact: people actually enjoy stories MORE if they're spoiled beforehand. If you go in completely blind you focus your attention on trying to understand the plot and the twist, but if you already know the twist you can enjoy the setup and scenery and get a much deeper appreciation for the work.

How about: Lady in the Water lol now that was a tip top film

Split was a great film, and when I saw it I didn't know it was a Shyamalan film, so that was the twist for me lol.

@@leetri I disagree. How can knowing the spoilers beforehand make the film better? There are still some emotions and reactions that will be generated from seeing the unexpected twist in a film. A feeling you will not get if you know about it and are waiting for it. At least by seeing a film fresh you get this experience and then if you want to try to understand how the film fits around this twist, you can watch the film a second (or more) time to see the things you previously missed. The twist is a part of the experience. Spoilers suck - but having good twists can make repeated viewing more enjoyable. Predestination (the Sarah Snook film) wouldn’t have left me sat in the movie theatre in awe if I knew the twist. Empire Strikes Back wouldn’t have had me so gripped as a child. Both me and my friend were shocked in Dusk til Dawn because we thought we were in to see a regular Tarantino film and hadn’t seen any info about this film. Lots of films I have enjoyed because of being suckered in, or because I think I spotted the twist and was wrong (or right) - it is a big part of the enjoyment of a film.

Never mind sequels, I’ve always been impressed with cinema’s ability to ‘coincidentally churn out clones seemingly simultaneously - Armageddon/deep impact, Dante’s peak/volcano, the Prestige/The Illusionist, K9/Turner & Houch, friends with benefits/no strings attached, Olympus has fallen/White House down, to name but a few...

The thing is, that kind of formula storytelling _does_ work in other mediums. There are soap operas that go on for literal decades, comic books that have been published for eighty years, pulp novels that churn out hundreds of adventures that have a similar feel. For some reason it's harder to that in movies.

Commendable real world use of the wonderful writing of such a great tv show! It seems to only get more and more relevant as the world grows more absurd.

I love 2 despite the general concept not making sense. (Why would a hunter be stalking people in a city?) That's the sign of well-made entertainment.

Same here, i really liked the sequel and thought it deserved more love. I felt similar about RoboCop 2, you could see that it was less ambitious or expensive, but they gave it their own spin and it was still authentic and true to the franchise. Bad example probably would be The Fly II, the old movies were pretty true to their nature, but the 80s sequel was a lot different, but.. i still liked it.

Predator is my favourite movie of all time, too. I’ll watch it at least once a year. The sequel I haven’t seen in 25ish years so I really should rewatch it. I liked the idea that the predators are an ancient species that go around the universe looking for the ultimate hunt. Or did I misread that?

@@Louis-wp3fq The reason Predator 2 is set in a city is because the first film was set in a jungle. Doing that again would've been too samey, so the sequel is set in the *other* kind of jungle - the "urban jungle" - instead. A bit of "jungle" wordplay from the scriptwriter, really :)

@@blatherskite3009 I always assumed that was probably the reason for the change of location. Still doesn't make much sense from the predator's POV.

Lolololol

They were DESPERATELY trying to capture some of the old magic, weren't they? "Let's show clips from the original movie's ending! That makes our ending good too, right?"

Plot twist, an old geezer filmed it all hoping to sell the footage to the newspapers. That's why he didn't lift a finger. He didn't care who won, all he saw was cash. 😏

What movie are y’all talking about?

I was thinking the same, i know that Glass was part of something, but it can't be a sequel to 6th Sense because.. well, he was dead, and Glass is pretty much the opposite of a dead guy (i haven't watched the movie, but i doubt that he's an indestructable ghost), i was assuming it was a joke on Georg's side.

Glass is a sequel to both _Unbreakable_ and _Split_ .

woooosh

@@MrParkerman6you're wrong

@@MrParkerman6 Exactly. Some of my favourite films have "workmanlike" direction that simply gets the job done in a solid, competent, unflashy way. What makes them great films are their imaginative scenarios, interesting themes, memorable characters and quotable dialog. And all of those things come from the script. If the script is poor then all of the director's best flashy moves, expensive CG, huge production values, etc., will only ever amount to a turd-polishing exercise. Yep, Terry Gilliam said much the same thing: he said the only real skill a director needs to have is the ability to communicate clearly what he wants to see to the actors and technicians who actually make it happen.

Oh man, Highlander II. That's a classic example of a director who didn't understand the appeal of his first movie. It always comes down to the characters and how well we identify with them.

@@Kevin_Street Yep. Highlander II sticks in my mind as the most egregious example of a sequel that totally failed to understand anything about the original film - what people liked about it, why it worked, what the established canon was, where to go with a sequel storyline ... any of it. It still boggles my mind that none of the people involved in such a huge production ever stuck their hand up and suggested the script could maybe, y'know, use a re-think. Especially director Russell Mulcahy and lead-actor Christopher Lambert, who you'd hope would've had at least SOME understanding of the film they had made. Personally, I would've stopped reading the script treatment and hired a different writer at the first mention of the Planet Zeist :)

At the start everyone believes the mom has gone crazy because she believed a shark killed her husband with fear and swam into warm waters to chase them down. What would've been an interesting movie is if, in the end, she was crazy and there was no shark.

@@wanderinghistorian or if it was a cute penguin that kept offering her a fish

It being set in the Bahamas was a condition of Michael Caine being in it.

They weren't direct sequels, but many people tried to copy them.

Toy Story did the same before the 4th one.

Because you are a connoisseur of fine cinema.

Aliens from Zeist. When I saw that I knew the people involved didn't care.

@@suimeingwong2043 They cared, but they ran into massive money and labor problems causing the company fronting them loans to take over creatively.

I don't know why you are thinking about such a thing since it DOESN'T EXIST. NO.

@@MammaApa indeed. There can be only one.

it can never happen. one lives in Wales the other only exists in our hearts and minds.

@@williamt.sherman9841 Naww Georg has said in the past that he lives in the USA. I think he's even in the Midwest.

@@PatchCornAdams723 he said he lives in Mexico.

That's how it's done. Own up to the fact you did it entirely for the money, not because you thought the movie would be good. I hope that pool is still lovely to this day. ...eh, he probably moved.

He actually said, he didn't remember the film, only the house it bought him..

Caine is a savage! 🤣

"I have never seen it (Jaws 4) but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built and it is terrific." That's what he said

Totally. The wachowskis had no idea why their movie was popular, or how it worked

I didnt like the movie, but the 100 agents Smith is actually a cool idea

Well ...have y'all seen the newest trailer? Its gonna get alot worse

I actually don't think Reloaded is that bad of a movie, sure the original is a total masterpiece and it doesn't compare but it's still a good blockbuster flick.

Revolutions is the one that really sucks

@@spanishprisoner M. Night Shyamalan's "Sixth Sense"; Richard Kelly's "Donnie Darko".

"A shark is a shark is a shark" - studio (Italian) suit in the "creative" meeting, while his Lamborghini parked in the handicapped spot and nobody does anything about it because "he's too powerful".

Another good sequel: spiderman 2

@@alexarias5717 Paddington 2! :)

@@alexarias5717 Yes definitely, I forgot about that.

Actually T2 undermines the first film. The idea that all terminator robots look like Arnie. In the first film it is pretty clear that you can’t tell a robot from a human. Hence the use of dogs. T2 just has a bigger budget, it is basically a remake.

@@NickLaslett Oh yes definitely, I can understand that point of view, it's still a fantastic movie, the original amazing too, more of a horror sci-fi thriller and the sequel is more of an action sci-fi.

Perfectly said

I hold that aside from a couple of films, George Lucas isn't a very good filmmaker; his biggest successes came from letting his team do their jobs. His wife editing Ep IV, his basically sitting out Ep V, etc. THX1138 stands out to me as a good film that was actually a Lucas film. Maybe American Graffiti? Ridley Scott used to be a sure bet but in the last 15 years or so he's hit or miss. The Martian and Blackhawk Down were great but his newer Alien films suck. Good thing he stepped aside and let Denis Villenueve handle Blade Runner 2049.

@@RCAvhstape i agree and think you are spot on. I remember seeing interviews with the various cast and crew of original trilogy, and one theme that came up was that they would stand up to Lucas and argue for changes. As you said, a lot was changed in the edit without his direct supervision, and Harrison Ford would constantly tell George that the dialogue was wrong “people don’t say that”. Then for the prequels, he just became too big for his own good. Everyone treated him like a god. The younger actors were in awe of him and wouldn’t dare question him and he had too much control over the final products. As en example of this - the critics at the time generally gave the Phantom Menace unfettered praise, so when I went to see it I was incredibly shocked/disappointed and wondered what the hell they had been watching. His ideas are great, but he did need to relinquish some of the responsibilities to others to help him put it to film. As for Ridley Scott - I get the feeling he no longer cares. The Alien prequels just didn’t have any of the magic of the earlier films, though to be fair, how many ways can you tell a monster story?

@@steves1015 Yep agree about Lucas. About Scott, I think he does care else he wouldn't be doing the newer Alien films, but I think he's too close to the problem and doesn't understand why he's getting it wrong. In Prometheus he tried to replicate the trope of the working class crewmen bitching about their pay, as in Alien, but this made no sense since it was a science mission with hand-picked specialists, not a freight hauler. Just one example of how he tried to fit square pegs into round holes. He hit it out of the park with The Martian, though, so he can still get it done if conditions are right.

​@@RCAvhstape It was not just Lucas' ego that came into play but also the fact that he was rather cynical and sometimes straight up an asshole when it comes to the original Star Wars. You mentioned TXH1138 - I can't remember where I read about it but Star Wars was supposed to be Lucas' cynical middle finger to Hollywood, originally designed as a Flash Gordon knockoff, a very simple Campbellian story that was designed to sell merch for kids. That apparently came from the fact that Lucas' earlier projects like the THX1138 were rather high concept and 'artsy' if you will with deeper themes and heavy narratives, but once Lucas got his foot in the door in the Hollywood film industry he realized none of that would fly so he made Star Wars. The entire thing was almost designed like a B movie with bad dialogue, absolutely ridiculous character design and ideas. Thankfully the people he worked with saw something in Star Wars and saved it from a complete disaster it would've been, but the asshole part of Lucas' personality really started to shine when he actively tried to remove his ex-wife Marcia from the credits who edited and arguably saved that film in the edit. At a certain point I guess he started thinking he was solely responsible for the success of Star Wars and his ego was fed by the Star Wars fandom that grew to some gigantic proportions by the time Lucas decided to make the Prequels. As for Ridley Scott, I think the problem with him is that he sucks at writing scripts and even selecting people who help him write his movies. He's absolutely great at visuals, worldbuilding and directing but that only works when there's good source material and most of the stuff he's done - they're adaptations, except for maybe the first Alien. So when time came for Ridley to revisit the world of Alien that was already butchered 3 times over by pop culture he had the task of giving that world a new angle but he failed to do that all throughout. You can see what he was trying to do though, he was somehow trying to tie in ancient aliens with Jesus and technology (in that we were created by Engineers and they sent one of their own to Earth as Jesus and we killed him so now they're out to kill us all for being some kind of failed experiment that got out of hand and all that spiced up with humans making androids that made the Xenomorph.... I think). And that is such a huge idea that needs to be first explored 100% before you even can attempt to write a script about it and distill it into a movie, but since Ridley couldn't handle it himself, he hired scriptwriters that butchered that idea - because apparently explaining such a grand idea by not explaining it at all on screen in Prometheus was the way to go, thanks Lindeloff. And with that one film the entire Alien franchise became a complete mess from the hands of its own creator who flailed around trying to explain some of it with Alien Covenant but that failed as well.

He is not a gun !

Respect that you brought that up. People are totally fine with calling out the later excesses of the Rambo series, but I will defend at least the 2nd film for having more going for it than is generally given credit for as a "Meathead" sequel.

Good point, although more of a remake than a sequel.

Totally agree! It is such a great format though: it is basically a dystopian future spaghetti western. As long as the movie makers understand the key ingredients, it is just a perfect recipe. It is not about the story, or the hero or the drama, it is about the action and getting immersed in the world of the film. And you get it: the world has gone to shit, it is every man for himself and there are awesome cars made from scrap metal. Bad guys make the joker look like Walther Cronkite Keep it stupid and you'll do fine.

It's interesting how Beyond Thunderdome started to lead the series off course, but in the years between 1985 and 2015 George Miller clearly refined his own understanding of what made the franchise work.

i'm waiting for the Snyder edit

I'm with you on that one. The main difference is that Conan the Barbarian 1982 is played absolutely straight, takes its subject seriously, and believes in itself. It really is as simple as that. There's none of the wink-to-camera "it's all a bit of a laugh, isn't it?" attitude that most other fantasy films fall prey to. Of course it also helped that Conan 1982 had the budget to realize what it wanted to put on-screen. Unlike many other fantasy films, viewers' immersion wasn't undermined by cheap and laughable sets, costumes, effects, lighting etc. That's important. Arguably, the only difference between Alien and dozens of previous sci-fi "creature features" is that Alien had the budget and technical talent to realize everything on-screen in an immersive and believable way that audiences were able to take seriously and not laugh at. So ... I suppose what I'm saying is that Conan 1982 is to fantasy films what Alien was to bug-eyed monster films, i.e. a glimpse of what happens if you give traditionally "B-Movie" subject-matter the A-Movie treatment and play it straight. It's not strictly-speaking "sword and sorcery" but the only film I've seen in recent years that captured some of that special sauce was Valhalla Rising (2009). It's a more art-house type film than Conan (hardly anyone speaks) and mostly keeps things real (albeit with an otherworldly air of legend about it) but I definitely got feels off it that I hadn't felt since seeing the 1982 Conan film.

@@blatherskite3009 Cool dude, I'll check Valhalla Rising out

@@tbone2646 Cool, hope you get something from it! Strange film, both mystical and visceral. See it in HD if you can because it's quite beautifully shot :)

@@tbone2646 I actually like the sequel, Conan The Destroyer, but it is so radically different in tone to the first film that I sort of mentally compartmentalise them from each other.

It can't be a fluke that George Lucas was instrumental in making some all time great Hollywood Pictures. As part of a team he was incredible. Pretty sure what happened was he become much more powerful in the industry and instead of being part of a team he hired a bunch of yes men. The only goal of the new team was to please George Lucas instead of making a great movie. George Lucas biggest weakness is not recognizing that he in fact has them.

@@Wallyworld30 I don't think it's a fluke, I just think Lucas only knows how to do BIG: big themes, big shots, big effects. As you correctly point out, when he's one voice on a team of equals he turns in his best work. When he has complete control, we get beautifully shot big battles with low stakes, because he hasn't put in the work to make us care about the characters. His small character moments are boring, hacky, camera a/camera b back and forth conversations with little or nothing of interest going on. Sure, there's the stilted dialog that everyone laughs about, but a movie like Empire shows that good actors with a good director can make Lucas's dialog work well enough. On the other hand, look at almost any scene in the prequels in which two characters are just talking without any action, and the whole scene will be blocked and shot with all the artistic flair and visual interest of a soap opera. Even the original Stars Wars film, as much as it was Lucas's baby, was only turned into the tight, exciting movie it became through the smart editing of Lucas's wife. The way it was originally scripted, there were two attacks on the Death Star, which was just sitting around. The idea to cut the shots so that the rebel pilots had to destroy before it could blast the rebel base--that is, main reason the scene has such great tension and urgency--was all Lucas's wife in the editing booth. It was also her idea to start the film by staying with the space chase/droids/Vader/etc.; the original script had those scenes interspersed with cuts to Luke watching the battle and bitching about moisture evaporaters and going to Toshi Station. All of which demonstrates to me that Lucas honestly didn't understand, and probably has never really understood, that people loved his films as much as they did because of the small character moments and little details that made the world feel real. The epic battles, special effects, and grand archetypal themes were cool and certainly contributed to the success of the films, but they weren't the reason the SW universe spawned millions of pages of fan fiction, or motivated middle aged fans to dress up in thousand-dollar, homemade stormtrooper costumes and go to conventions 30 yrs after the films were released. That kind of devotion requires a much more personal and human connection that seems totally alien to Lucas...no pun intended.

@@hatuletoh Nice reply... I'm off to go watch RedLetterMedia review of the Prequels again. I'm due it's been 4 years or so since I've watched them. Now you have me hyped to to watch them again! Need to go buy some pizza rolls for the occasion.

The sequels are just badly planned.

I wasn't actually sure what point he was making there honestly with that comparison. I'd say TLW pretty closely adheres to the James Cameron school of sequel craft. Replicate all of the original beats almost down to the exact minute but remixed in a whole new manner, with a larger ensemble, more complicated motivations and connective plotting, and increasing the overall scale. It's largely successful particularly due to its heavy tonal shift where, we know bad stuff comes from meddling with these beasts, and here we are again- the sense of foreboding is strong and the mood is entirely different. Perhaps that was a turnoff for some who loved all the wonderment of the first, but it definitely works for a lot of people.

I really believe The Lost World: Jurassic Park is the best of the Jurassic sequels. Its a darker movie than the first in its tone and visuals. The score by John Williams is fantastic as well.

nah see that was the problem with the film, there was too much introspective "what does it mean to be a robo cop?" and not enough fun

I appreciate they took a different approach. They basically tried to make a very human piece about rehab after a life changing injury (such as when a soldier loses limbs to an IED). The problem was they basically tried to force onto that film the majority of the plot from the original and because they spent so much time with the rehab stuff everything else felt rushed and insignificant. To me it seemed like everything would have been a whole lot better had they just made a different movie with no direct ties to Robocop thereby freeing themselves from any kind of plot commitment. But alas these days this is what happens to many franchises. People have in mind the movie they want to make, the studio wants the franchise film and so they go and turn their movie into that franchise film/sequel/reboot.

Star Wars started as 'Flash Gordon meets Akira Kurosawa' but moved rapidly into 'Kenner meets your wallet', before being re-booted as 'Lucasfilm meets your credit card' and re-rebooted as 'Disney wants your everything.'

@@Grim_Beard Star Wars A New Hope was good because I lot of other people were telling George to take out all the Goofy stuff and politics. When He made Episode I no one would challenge what he said anymore so he got to put all the politics and goofy stuff back in.

The prequels are better than the OT, fite me :^)

2 John 2 Malkovich

Adaption 2, because Charlie Kaufmann didn't know how to adapt a book again

2 be John Malkovich

I thought that was Inception?

It could be a third sequel, it explores the same premise of people who have some kind of supernatural powers. I think he just got confused about the entirety of M night catalog just because they both have Bruce Willis. It technically could be in the same universe though.

@@DeathBYDesign666 It's not any kind of a sequel, it's a joke my dude

@@DeathBYDesign666 Meh, it probably could be the sequel to it. In my mind, it's pretty much a crossover between all of his movies, including Avatar, The Visit, After Earth, and The Lady In The Water.

@@Noms_Chompsky Well the movie in question definitely is a second sequel and he plays it so straight that you can't tell if he is indeed joking. In any case I was saying it could be and that I think is the joke because one can never be sure with his projects.

Do you realise just how cynical that is? Let's put traumatized people in labour camps, it will clear their heads.

Ahahah well said

It also telegraphed its plot points, resurrected Rachel for nothing, reduced Decker to a damsel in distress and, had a soundtrack that could obliterate kidney stones.

Tron Legacy sucked tho

I think the only thing I really hated was the stupid continuing trend of the “teal and pee yellow” CG color grading that has been ruining film cinematography for the past 2 decades.

@@TheRealNormanBates I'd blame Wall Street for that. Apparently, the reason it looks like that is because when you stare at the color for a long time you'll literally see green when you close your eyes. A bunch of people thought the idea was really cool and wanted to use it in their movies.

It really wasn't a metaphor. It was a "our original idea sucked so we're making it more like the original" sort of a thing. The shark was supposed to just bleed out after being stabbed with a massive wooden pole. Nobody liked it, so they added clips of Roy Shieder and made the shark detonate for no reason.

Giger: "The head is crap, I can barely tell its in the shape of the penis. And where are all the vagina orifices? Pointless design."

How in the world is a video able to freshen you up? Next you'll be claming sharks can exolode.

It can still be done right even if it is. The godfather from novel to movie to sequel were exactly that.

You can spoil a twist, but you can't spoil a good movie. Like Star Wars, like 6th Sense.

Shymalan & Cameron should sue- both the sixth sense & Titanic have the exact same premise - Icy Dead People.

@@vaclav_fejt Can you.... twist a spoil? Has it been done?

you see bruce willis die in the first 10 mins and people thought it was a shock surprise that he was a ghost , stupid movie

@@im3phirebird81 most movies ‘try’ to do that already - how many trailers have you watched where two shots are shown and you assume something about the plot but when you see the film the context is completely different and the two scenes are unrelated to each other - it’s done, but not done well.

I rather watch all Rocky movies several times over before watching all the Terminator movies, at least Rocky and First Blood turned into good extremely different sort of movies as opposed to total crap. I mean rocky 6 and Creed are actually close to the first one.

Or a shirt with Nicolas Cage saying “Why is it burned? _Why is it burned?!_ _WHY IS IT BURNED?!!”_

I can think of far worse sequels. Like Alien 3, Cars 2 and Rise Of Skywalker.

What a pleasant surprise to see the one and only Jedi Bunny in the comments!

@@IAmIronRaiden awww hey! So nice to see you here! Georg’s is one of my very favourite channels!

@@JediBunny He certainly does do some quality stuff. Your last video was as well! I look forward to seeing you around!

@@IAmIronRaiden thank you so much for saying so, I appreciate that so much!

@@JediBunny Good to see you!

It helped me to understand the first film.

@@wanderinghistorian Lot less pointless filler of showing off the special effects.

@@Clay3613 that what sold the original, certainly not the pacing and dialogue lol!

@@wanderinghistorian you are not supposed to understand 2001. That's the whole point. It is vague on purpose. Kubrick made it so you can have a spiritual epiphany. So you ask the big question. There's no answer to the question but it is worthwhile to ask anyways.

Well to be fair Morrell's book is quite a bit different from the first movie and the character of John Rambo is quite a bit different between the two mediums. In the book Rambo kills readily and it's only because Teasle was in the Korean War (as I remember) that he survives until the end when both shoot each other during the climax as every other civilian and deputy that tries to stop Rambo over the course of the book ends up dead from Rambo's hand. So in a lot of ways the John Rambo in the sequel movies is more alike with the first book's than the first movie's.

@@jcohasset23 Interesting. Thank you for clarifying.

Yeah but they paid the bills.

The other amazing thing about Dr Sleep, is that Stephen King hated what Kubrick did with the Jack Torrance character, so the film maker was juggling the legacy of two creative genius, seeking to honour them both and right the wrong of the mischaracterisation in the film version of The Shining. The film is different from the book for that reason. An amazing hybrid.

They also greatly expanded on the plot and the action, the budget was through the roof.

It also has *2* antagonists!