View Single Post
  #18  
Old 03-16-2008, 08:11 PM
colonyearth colonyearth is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livingston View Post
Oh no, I'm not judging Trek based on Clover, just was surprised to hear that it already had a sequel in the works. Truth is, I have no idea what this Trek movie is going to be like, like so many others I'd say, so I try to remain open minded about it. If they can make three great movies that will add to the franchise in a way that will help it move forward, then I'm all for it. I think Abrams will deliver a good movie, I like his other work quite a bit and yes, Cloverfield, though he didn't direct was fantastic! I loved Cloverfield, I just don't know how a sequel to it would work. I'm not saying it's impossible, it's just my first thought on hearing it. To me sequels are tough and they can leave a bad taste, impression on it's predecessors. Just look at Nemesis, it wrecked TNG. To me one of the best instances of a remarkable sequel was Godfather Part II. Now seeing Godfather, I might think the same and say, I don't see how a sequel could happen, but they did it. Maybe Cloverfield would work as a sequel but my instincts tell me no.
Nice to know we actually pretty much agree. Sequels are always in iffy thing. However, that said, if they're pre-planned (like more and more are these days) and the filmmakers and writers go into a project with more story already in mind and more character development they want to do and explore, then usually a sequel is good and sometimes even better than the original. A good example of this recently would be X-men and X-men 2 (let's please forget X-men 3 ever happened). Singer built a solid foundation with the first film, but had more story he wanted to tell should the opportunity be made available to him. When it was, he made a bigger and better film now that he had established his characters and his vision for the universe and thus, X-men 2 was a better film overall (X-men 3 would've been an incredible finale had Singer not left and had he been able to complete his story arc he was building. Only a few elements of Singer's trilogy ideas remained in Ratner's horrid and forgetable attempt at a third installment.)

I believe this will be said of Singer's Superman franchise as well once all is said an done. Superman Returns was simply a reintroduction to the characters and setting up where they were...the next one...now that will rock bigtime! I believe the new Batman will also fit this situation.

However, when the sequel was never really planned but was made because the first one did so well, then the 2nd and all subsequent films usually suck more and more progressively with each film. (One exception to this was Alien and Aliens, the 2nd being a different film, but just as good as the original -- but let's not mention the money-hungry attempts at further films after Aliens, they fit the second sequel situation.)

I really do believe that Orci, Kurtzman and JJ and all the rest have already had serious discussions on a bigger arc and sequels and have made this first film in such a way that there is more story and character to build upon and perhaps even an overall story orc. Or at least a minor arc like ST 2-4.

CE

Last edited by colonyearth : 03-16-2008 at 08:14 PM.
Reply With Quote