Started By
Message

re: Movies that do not need sequels

Posted on 3/11/10 at 4:29 am to
Posted by Jiggles
New Orleans
Member since Mar 2010
19 posts
Posted on 3/11/10 at 4:29 am to
Meh... they're coming out with Ironman 2 now. I effing loved Ironman and I really hope it won't be tainted. (ha... I said taint.)

It could be good... there is a certain stigma toward sequels that is kind of unfair. People don't talk about good sequels because most good movies do it right the first time.
Posted by 4nmylifetime
668 Neighbor to the Beast
Member since Jun 2009
2844 posts
Posted on 3/11/10 at 2:35 pm to
quote:

Meh... they're coming out with Ironman 2 now. I effing loved Ironman and I really hope it won't be tainted. (ha... I said taint.)

It could be good... there is a certain stigma toward sequels that is kind of unfair. People don't talk about good sequels because most good movies do it right the first time.


Actualy I think that comic book movies are the exception to the rule. Because the first movie in the series is always the origin story of the charecter. Most of these stories we already know so I tend to like the sequel as much as the first go around.

Highlander was one that they should have left alone.

On the opposite thought, I would'nt mind another Riddick movie if it was done right. I love that charecter.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram