What are you favorite 15 films?

Malte279 · **Reply #60 on:** April 09, 2006, 06:20:06 PM

As I said I never watched "Lady and the Tramp" I did not watch the sequel either and I don't have any intentions to do so any time soon. However, if it comes to sequel making I could think of something from what I heard on the audio play. For no matter what, the extreme social differences between the two dogs remain and their different values or estimations on what is proper could create an interesting conflict. Especially if there are puppies and the parents disagree on who they should be brought up.
That kind of stories usually ends with the beggar marrying the princes and everyone being happy ever after. Realistically it is likely that there would be at least some trouble about that happy ever after business. Would a poor but proud character want to become a pampered prince? Would a princess ever really abandon her reservations against lower class people (or in this case dogs?) would perhaps both of them try so intensely to act like the other one that by doing so they abandon their original habits which made them lovable for the other one? As I said, I am not at all into these movies I haven't even seen. Nevertheless I would find it quite easy to continue the story being told on that audio play I listened to.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #61 on:** April 10, 2006, 03:42:53 AM

Not in this case. I meant when I said that they really, really had wrapped up their story tot he point where continuing it would be nothing but a money-seeking attempt to cash-in on earlier success.

I also think you should give "Lady and the Tramp" a chance, Malte. Its a classic.

Malte279 · **Reply #62 on:** April 10, 2006, 04:05:21 AM

Quote

I meant when I said that they really, really had wrapped up their story tot he point where continuing it would be nothing but a money-seeking attempt to cash-in on earlier success.

The very same thing has often been said about the land before time. I even think that those who say so have some points. LBT was a completely wrapped story. They had reached their blessed Valley and were originally supposed to live happily ever after. They had to "take some of that wrapping away" in order to start with the sequels (e.g. making the Great Valley not the last green spot in the world etc.).
But inspite of all this I wholeheartedly love most of the sequels and so I dare say so do most people here. Not all money-seeking attempts to cash-in on earlier success lead necessarily to poor results.

Quote

I also think you should give "Lady and the Tramp" a chance, Malte. Its a classic.

When I put strong emphasis on the fact that I didn't see it, I did so in order to avoid any conflict that might have been caused had people thought that I was equally informed about "Lady and the Tramp" as you are and then talk things that might appear as plain rubbish to those who know more about this than I do. Should a tape or DvD of "Lady and the Tramp" end up in my hands somehow I wouldn't refuse to watch it.

Nick22 · **Reply #63 on:** April 10, 2006, 09:18:46 AM

Wr has a point. While Lady and Tramp had kids at the end of lady and the trump, and thus creating an opening for a sequel, if they had wanted a sequel, Disney should have made one decades ago. Instead the sequel is rushed out 50 years after the first, and is basically a rehash of the first one. Lion King 2 came out a few years after the original but it was a medicore effort, and imo tarnished the original. The original summoned images of Hamlet, the second? images of a children's showing of Romeo and Juliet.

Petrie. · **Reply #64 on:** April 10, 2006, 12:38:48 PM

There is no such thing as a good sequel.

Malte279 · **Reply #65 on:** April 10, 2006, 03:18:13 PM

Quote

There is no such thing as a good sequel.

Meaning that you consider the creation of a good sequel an impossible thing? :huh:
I must disagree on that.

Quote

Wr has a point. While Lady and Tramp had kids at the end of lady and the trump, and thus creating an opening for a sequel, if they had wanted a sequel, Disney should have made one decades ago.

I did not look at the time at all when the movies appeared. I find it matters very little. It is more the content of a story that matters than the time by which the story is told. A long time gap between original tale and sequel need not make a sequel worse. From the mere aspect of potential stuff for another story I think "Lady and the Tramp" could work out for an interesting sequel.

Quote

Lion King 2 came out a few years after the original but it was a medicore effort, and imo tarnished the original.

To that I agree.

Dash The Longneck · **Reply #66 on:** April 11, 2006, 12:21:49 AM

Quote from: Nick22,Apr 3 2006 on 03:36 PM

Lion King 2 Bambi 2, Lady and the Trump 2? No offense but those sequels suck, they can't hold candles to the originals. Why Disney felt they had to add sequels onto films that were 50 and 60 years old boggles the mind. Next they'll make sequel to Pinnochio

I loved the originals I really did the original Bambi was even on my list and the Lion King 1. But, there's no offence taken I just have a really big tolerance for sequeal movies. A movie has too be really, really, really, bad for me not too like it at least a little.

buba · **Reply #67 on:** April 11, 2006, 02:37:09 AM

I dont know why people think that sequels suck. Maybe they arent better than original movies, but why they are bad?
There are sequels that are better than originals.
Land Before Time has better sequels

.

Dash The Longneck · **Reply #68 on:** April 11, 2006, 07:33:30 AM

Mostly people think just Disney sequeals suck. I am one of the few who doesn't LBT has some of the most amazing sequeals I've ever seen,

Nick22 · **Reply #69 on:** April 11, 2006, 09:26:41 AM

In reponse buba, most 'sucky' sequels are made by Disney. the original films have been well-recieved and had become beloved by those that watched them. The stories were well-written, and the audience may have known the stories previously. Furthermore those stories stood by themselves for many years, no sequels were made to them. At a certain point after the original film, a sequel becomes unnecessary. the actors and actresses who played the characters can no longer play them in a sequel. In Walt Disney's time there were no sequels, but a fresh and different story. Sleeping beauty, Fantasia, Peter Pan etc, each one different. The first sequel to a Disney film was The Rescuers Down Under and that took place 13 years after the original film. It was good, not quite as good as the original, but when compared to more recent sequels it ranks near the top. The Sequels that are as good or better than the original film are few in number, those that are are either part of a long series, see LOTR, or the original was merely decent to begin with.
As for why are the sequels bad? First, most sequels do not get shown in theaters, but rather are direct-to-video releases. Lion King 2, Cinderella 2, Bambi 2 Pocohantas 2 etc. The few that do get put into theaters rarely do well. See Jungle Book 2 and Peter Pan 2. I had the misfortune of seeing Peter Pan 2, and it paled in comparison to the original.

Dash The Longneck · **Reply #70 on:** April 11, 2006, 09:07:39 PM

I even have too admit The sequeals aren't good as the originals for most of the Disney Sequeals they're just a way for Disney too make more money. What I can't stand is when they make a third sequeal too the movie. When I read about Ciderella III coming out and Little Mermaid 3 that made me so angry I couldn't even think straight. Most of the Disney sequeals I never even gave a chance. But I'm just the type of person who likes most of the disney ones as long as they don't make a third.

Nick22 · **Reply #71 on:** April 12, 2006, 09:31:54 AM

Cinderella 3/

lLet me guess , her daughter has to work for her step-aunts :cry2 I hope it never gets made. little Mermaid 3? WHY?

Dash The Longneck · **Reply #72 on:** April 12, 2006, 11:38:11 AM

Like I said it's just a way for them too make more money which is probably not gonna happen anyway. I have a source. I'm at a Disney forum and on the upcoming releases both Cinderella III and Little Mermaid 3 are both scheduled DTV'S for 2007.

Nick22 · **Reply #73 on:** April 12, 2006, 12:22:33 PM

Dash, Any plans for a sleeping beauty 2? :mad

Malte279 · **Reply #74 on:** April 12, 2006, 02:39:12 PM

Quote

Cinderella 3/ lLet me guess , her daughter has to work for her step-aunts I hope it never gets made. little Mermaid 3? WHY?

By all means let them make those sequels and by all means don't watch them if you don't want to.
What do you think how many people would say land before time 13? WHY? Should they therefore not make it? If there are people who want to watch Cinderella3 or Mermaid 3, why shouldn't those sequels be made for them? Why should those who don't like these sequels care at all?

Nick22 · **Reply #75 on:** April 12, 2006, 04:40:04 PM

It is because I loved the originals malte, and hate to see cheap 'sequels' made to them. Of Course, the same could be said about lBT, and likely has.

action9000 · **Reply #76 on:** April 12, 2006, 05:18:27 PM

Quote

Of Course, the same could be said about lBT, and likely has.

That's the truth of it, right there. The Disney sequels are really no different from the LBT sequels.

Let's look at some Disney sequels. The problem is, I haven't seen many, so it is difficult for me to give a clean response. The Lion King 2, for instance, was considered a watered-down version of "Romeo and Juliet". I agree with this summary, and I also feel that the quality was somewhat paled compared to the original Lion King.

Using the same comparison, let's look at LBT 1 and LBT 2. LBT 1 is considered a classic by many adults, and there is a large audience of people who appreciate it for what it is, including many members of my own family. LBT 2 was looked upon by the public as a "Children's only" Sequel, and the film was more-or-less disregarded by the general population. Also notice that LBT 2 never made it to theatres. Films that are shown in theatres generally have larger public appeal. Few Disney sequels made it as far as the theatre, and I'm sure many of them lacked the overall quality of the original

A similar situation exists for the LBT series. The original is almost on a level of its own, with the sequels sitting parallel to it. Many viewers put them on the same level, saying the sequels are "lower-quality" than the original.

I think the same is true for Disney movies and their sequels. The sequels aren't necessarily written for the same audience as the originals were, so many years ago. They're written for the attached audience who wants to see more of their favorite characters. The storylines are different, just like the LBT series storylines are different from the original.

I can respect the Disney series of sequels, just as I respect the LBT series. They each have their dedicated fans and their target audience. having seen very few Disney sequels, I will give them the benefit of the doubt as to their quality. I was never enough of a "classic" disney fan to get into the Cinderella and Little Mermaid sequels. I enjoyed "The Lion King" enough that I had to see the sequel. It wasn't bad, but I still prefer the original.

Dash The Longneck · **Reply #77 on:** April 12, 2006, 10:52:35 PM

Quote from: action9000,Apr 12 2006 on 04:18 PM

Quote
Of Course, the same could be said about lBT, and likely has.
That's the truth of it, right there. The Disney sequels are really no different from the LBT sequels.

Let's look at some Disney sequels. The problem is, I haven't seen many, so it is difficult for me to give a clean response. The Lion King 2, for instance, was considered a watered-down version of "Romeo and Juliet". I agree with this summary, and I also feel that the quality was somewhat paled compared to the original Lion King.

Using the same comparison, let's look at LBT 1 and LBT 2. LBT 1 is considered a classic by many adults, and there is a large audience of people who appreciate it for what it is, including many members of my own family. LBT 2 was looked upon by the public as a "Children's only" Sequel, and the film was more-or-less disregarded by the general population. Also notice that LBT 2 never made it to theatres. Films that are shown in theatres generally have larger public appeal. Few Disney sequels made it as far as the theatre, and I'm sure many of them lacked the overall quality of the original

A similar situation exists for the LBT series. The original is almost on a level of its own, with the sequels sitting parallel to it. Many viewers put them on the same level, saying the sequels are "lower-quality" than the original.

I think the same is true for Disney movies and their sequels. The sequels aren't necessarily written for the same audience as the originals were, so many years ago. They're written for the attached audience who wants to see more of their favorite characters. The storylines are different, just like the LBT series storylines are different from the original.

I can respect the Disney series of sequels, just as I respect the LBT series. They each have their dedicated fans and their target audience. having seen very few Disney sequels, I will give them the benefit of the doubt as to their quality. I was never enough of a "classic" disney fan to get into the Cinderella and Little Mermaid sequels. I enjoyed "The Lion King" enough that I had to see the sequel. It wasn't bad, but I still prefer the original.

I had never thought about that. You are absoloutely right. I didn't like Lion King 2 as much as Lion King 1 also.

Petrie. · **Reply #78 on:** April 13, 2006, 08:37:23 AM

I guess I can't put any sarcasm in my posts Malte because you pretend it isn't there.

: A good 95% of the sequels I have seen to original films absolutely are terrible because they either

a.) lose characters in the process
b.) lose some of the original people from the first so the feel is different
c.) the storyline is just "wtf"

I'll give you a teeny tiny list of sequels I have actually watched and didn't outright bash or hate:

-The original Star Wars triology (Empire and Jedi are technically sequels)
-Shrek 2
-LBT 9

Yup....four. That's it. -_-

Malte279 · **Reply #79 on:** April 13, 2006, 11:21:03 AM

So you bash or dislike LBT 2 to 8 and 10-11? :blink:
I knew you were not as fond of the sequels as some people are but does it really come to hating and bashing the others? Looking at your activity in this forum, your messages and stuff I don't really think so.