Originally Posted by richy
A Serenity sequel would be nice. A Hellboy sequel would be nice. Harry Potter sequels could be nice. But probably sans quidditch sequences, thank you. A sequel to Terminator: Salvation would be nice.
A new Harry Potter book is being written that doesn't have the characters in it but it is set in the same universe - they may adapt it to a movie at some point. As for Hellboy, the second film was much better in my opinion than the first and I would definitely be up for a third. Hopefully the new Terminator film has a thread connecting it to Salvation.
Originally Posted by moonshieldmedia
There are many unfortunate and unnecessary ones, but every once in a while, new technology or a unique filmmaker can put a different spin on it that makes it work. Tron Legacy would be a recent example in my opinion.
In general I'm not too interested in sequels because the films that I think are the most beautiful tend to stand alone. The films that get sequels (nowadays at least) tend to be mindless entertainment, but even if I just want to sit back and enjoy the ride, the 2nd time around it looses a bit of the spectacle for me.
BUT
I was thinking recently about my all-time favorite trilogy, Back to the Future, and even though I think it ended beautifully, it might be really fun to pick that story back up again with just the Doc. Christopher Lloyd is still a fantastic actor who could carry a film on his own. The only way to take the story to the next level would be to explore the extremes of time travel, very very distant futures and ancient pasts. It would look amazing with modern technology and could even be a little darker, while keeping the original comedic charm. Just a thought.
Tron Legacy was a good movie. It was great to see the world of Tron be updated as if it were like a new Operating System. The only weakness I remember is some of the CG shots of the young version of Jeff Bridges but other than that I really enjoyed it.
I like your Back to the Future sequel idea. I think another approach would be to have Marty and Jennifer's son be the centre of the story. But instead of having Michael J Fox portray the role with CG to make him younger, have a new actor play the part. You could get away with it because the events of Back to the Future III created a new timeline.
Marty's son discovers a mix-tape of his father's that has a couple of songs he recorded on guitar when he was a teenager. He goes and shows his father and Marty tells him that when he was his age he wanted to be a Rock Star but that he's happy with his current job - what that is I don't know but it makes Marty's son think: "Man, if only dad had become a Rock Star, we'd all be famous"
Then all you would need is a way for Doc, Clara, Jules and Verne to show up, maybe just to visit Marty and Jennifer. Perhaps they haven't seen each other for a very long time and in the meantime Marty and Jennifer had their son. So Marty's son is amazed to see the time travelling train and when Doc and his family leave, Marty's son sneaks on board the machine realising what he can do. He remains undetected and uses the time machine to go back to when his father was a teenager.
Now you could get very complicated here and do something similar to Back to the Future II where Marty interacts with his self from 1985 that is stranded in 1955. Instead in this case Marty's son travels to 1985 to try and intervene with his father's life. Unfortunately he makes a mistake that creates a timeline where his parents are practically homeless and Marty's son must rectify things.
Ultimately he fixes everything and learns that maybe you need to be grateful for what you do have.
This story could do a few things:
1) Michael J Fox wouldn't be needed for the whole film.
2) Older fans will get a lot fun out of the nods and references to the Back to the Future trilogy.
3) Potential for more films that follow Marty's son.
4) For 80s buffs to get nostalgic with the segment of the film set in 1985
Originally Posted by mad_hatter
Remakes, by definition, need to follow the same storyline as the original source material (plot points can differ, but the overall story has to be the same). If they don’t, they aren’t a remake. For example, “The Texas Chansaw Massacre” and “Friday the 13th” aren’t really remakes; the term “reboot” sits much better. That said, off the top of my head, I can’t think of any film I’d like to see remade.
As for sequels, I’m a horror fan, so I’d be more than happy to see sequels to some of the franchises (which, we no doubt will). A new “Friday…”, “Nightmare….”, “Chainsaw…” and “Halloween” could be good. They could also be terrible. Either way, I’ll take it.
Prequels are difficult. It’s hard to imagine a prequel to any movie, really. Most films don’t have unexplained back stories. If it’s not shown on film, it’s irrelevant. That, or we’re told what we need to know through the narrative. IMHO, the absolute worst prequel has to have been “Hannibal Rising” (even though it was based on the book (the book having been forced by the movie studio)). To give such a pathetic and unnecessary back story to such an iconic psychopath was just horrendous. That said, the TV show “Hannibal” was great (didn’t try to explain the cannibalism, just gave us another branch to the story). I also enjoyed “Bates Motel”, for much the same reason. “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” was excellent, can’t wait for the sequel to the prequel (wonder if there’ll be a remake?). One film that could do with a remake is “Alien”
On a side note, what do we classify “Batman Begins” as?
On another side note, I think it’s worth noting that not all remakes are actually remakes. Take “Carrie” for example. The new movie isn’t a remake of the Brian De Palma film; it’s just another version of the Stephen King novel. You know, nobody ever calls Peter Jacksons “Lord of the Rings” a remake of the 1978 animated film. Nobody considers “Red Dragon” (starring Anthony Hopkins) a remake of “Manhunter”. We just seem to use whatever term we see fit. But, whatever…
I liked the Texas Chainsaw Massacre reboot. I have to watch the Friday the 13th reboot again because the first time I watched it I wasn't really paying much attention. I too would like to see more entries in these franchises.
I would classify Batman Begins the same way you classify Carrie (2013). Batman Begins is just another adaptation of the Batman character based on the source material. This is the same thinking I wish all the people behind the Total Recall remake adhered to because just taking every single beat out of the original and putting it in a new film with updated special effects isn't productive. Especially in the case of the Total Recall remake with the female alien with the extra...
which in the context of the film not taking place on Mars, thereby not being a mutant, makes her appearance redundant.
Somewhere maybe twenty to thirty years from now someone else will do a version of Lord of the Rings and so audiences of that time will probably discuss whether it's a remake or just another adaptation of Lord of the Rings.
Who knows, we might even be discussing the same thing on here during that time
