Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Friday the 13th lawsuit -- the saga continues

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Chex View Post

    Just wanted to add in a small correction to this. Halloween isn't close to It's numbers although it's done spectacular for the series. As per boxofficemojo:

    Halloween 2018:
    Domestic - $156,968,730
    Foreign - $ 88,000.000
    Total Global - $ 245,268,730


    It:
    Domestic - $327,481,748
    Foreign - $372,900,000
    Total Global - $700,381,748

    Without adjusting for inflation, It is the highest grossing horror film of all time.
    Personal taste, unpopular horror opinion:

    I found IT incredibly dull. I could not sit through it.

    I grew up watching King's movies and IT felt, to me, like the original IT mini-series (1990) in the setting of Stand by me (1986). Similarly, I am unable to watch Stranger Things without falling asleep.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
      I wrote this comment on Dave McRae's latest video regarding Lebron James pitching in money for a new F13 movie and I figured I should just copy and paste the thing here because it's basically going to be the same comment I wanted to contribute here in this discussion. It saves me the writing.

      Basically, we don't need a new Friday the 13th movie. We don't need a new Nightmare on Elm Street movie. Those stories have been dragged out and flipped around as many things that even a reboot series couldn't even be original with them. Rebooting them would be pointless because where can you go with them next that we haven't seen out of the endless sequels of their original series? This is why these icons just need to be put to rest and Hollywood need to start focusing on NEW icons to spring up and not be stuck resurrecting what already had it's fair run. The only thing I see coming out of both franchise is one more crossover movie that we should have had for years now. A Freddy Vs. Jason 2 set between the first movie and Jason X. Give these guys one final fight and final hurrah and then end it. Jason met his end at the end of Jason X being burned up through the atmosphere, but there's still one more story you can do with him so it should be before Jason X so we have a film that helps transition from Freddy Vs. Jason and Jason X better. But if this is gonna follow Freddy Vs. Jason, then Freddy should be involved. Freddy can have his final demise in the movie and spare the need of another individual sequel that's probably gonna be nothing new or different anyway. Another crossover movie would be perfect since there's more originality with the clashing concept and you're killing two birds with one stone if you want to end off both franchises at once. Also, this could open the door for other horror crossover movies. Why should the Superhero movies get the crossover glory?

      As Chex stated above, it's a shame nothing further was done with the crossover aspect and I think now is the time they do that. No more reboots or a regular sequel and certainly no pathetic retcons like the Halloween 2018 movie did. Just a crossover that closes up ties and closes up two franchises that has ran their course.
      I disagree. I may not need more Friday the 13th or A Nightmare on Elm Street movies. but I sure as Hell want them. As long as the stories entertain me I'm always up for more. I'm even willing to entertain the idea of reboots or remakes, I just need to see if I like what they come up with.

      I'd say that movies in general aren't about 'need', they're about 'want.' They're about entertainment. Freddy and Jason entertain me, so give me more. If other people aren't interested that's fine, there are other movies for them to watch. But, don't take Freddy and Jason away from me.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
        I swear they better not retcon a thing or I wish them nothing but disaster. You can't say you're a fan of the franchise but then want to disrespect the movies by erasing them like they did with Halloween. That was the stupidest thing they could have ever done.
        Honestly, the more I think about it, the more there's a part of me that thinks Michael, Jason, and Freddy should be at the same level as characters like Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, and The Mummy, in the sense that they don't necessarily need to be confined to one continuity. If you look at Dracula alone there are all kinds of stories out there about him that aren't connected to each other. You have Bram Stoker's original novel, you have the classic Universal films, you have the Hammer films, you have the Dracula 2000 trilogy, you have Monster Squad, you have Francis Ford Coppola's film, etc. Marvel has their own version of Dracula. I think DC has or had their own version of him. You have all of these different versions of the same basic character and yet most of them are completely independent of each other.

        Part of me wonders if Michael, Jason, and Freddy can't be like this. Do they really need to follow one specific continuity forever, or can different people take the characters and go in their own directions with them independent of each other? Obviously, copyright issues come into play here, but for now I'm thinking from a creative standpoint.
        Last edited by Darth Reaper; 11-21-2018, 11:16 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Oh NO! You are NOT going to use the Frankenstein and Dracula thing to make excuses for why Michael, Freddy, and Jason should be like that. First off, those movies are from BOOKS and a book is bound to be adapted right and left until the pages all fall out. Second, most of those movies suck anyway and the endless continuities lead to mass confusion. You can't keep up with them and concepts have gone just bizarre with them each. So if I had it my way, a chunk of those movies wouldn't even be there. There is a time to just let things go and let the movies made at the time with worthy stories to tell be the ones that are brought to future generations. No need to keep restarting all the time that just makes the last batch of movies pointless. I complain about this with Scooby-Doo. So many shows and movies and like 75% of them were all a waste and total garbage and it sucks that the shows hardly reach three seasons and FIFTY freaking episodes. Something like "The Simpsons" is great because we got ONE SOLID SHOW. No cut offs, no revamps, no endless movies, just one straight ride. That's the treatment Scooby Doo should have gotten. That's the treatment these horror movies need. Keep it stable and solid with one continuity so it's easier to manage and cut it off when the time is right before you start getting into some ridiculous territory that stems so far away from how the story and villains started off as that they might as well be their own creations.

          So you think because the original monsters got their asses exploited to the pit of the universe makes it okay that every other monster or horror icon villain gets the same treatment. But you fail to realize that all of that left to confusion amongst the story line, especially when sequels part of the same series are ignoring each other as in the case with Halloween and the endless movies in which most of which are forgettable and were a waste to make to begin with. Why risk cranking that out? There is such a thing as having too much and I prefer not to milk these cows any more than needed. Let's make room for new cows to produce their milk, new icons. HOWEVER, I'll allow for something to extend so damn long is if the story is consistent. So if Frankenstein, Dracula, and whoever kept ONE SERIES the entire way through with no retcons, reboots, and even passing the torch so we had offspring characters carry out the series, then that I can let pass. But all these different series of movies and timelines and variations of these characters? No thank you. Look at Star Wars. Over forty years and we managed to keep ONE UNIVERSE of material that passed down from one generation of characters to another and no curve ball thrown in to take us back to the beginning. If franchises were more like that, I'd be more satisfied with the movie industry.
          Last edited by DevonteHuntley; 11-21-2018, 02:49 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
            Oh NO! You are NOT going to use the Frankenstein and Dracula thing to make excuses for why Michael, Freddy, and Jason should be like that. First off, those movies are from BOOKS and a book is bound to be adapted right and left until the pages all fall out. Second, most of those movies suck anyway and the endless continuities lead to mass confusion. You can't keep up with them and concepts have gone just bizarre with them each. So if I had it my way, a chunk of those movies wouldn't even be there. There is a time to just let things go and let the movies made at the time with worthy stories to tell be the ones that are brought to future generations. No need to keep restarting all the time that just makes the last batch of movies pointless. I complain about this with Scooby-Doo. So many shows and movies and like 75% of them were all a waste and total garbage and it sucks that the shows hardly reach three seasons and FIFTY freaking episodes. Something like "The Simpsons" is great because we got ONE SOLID SHOW. No cut offs, no revamps, no endless movies, just one straight ride. That's the treatment Scooby Doo should have gotten. That's the treatment these horror movies need. Keep it stable and solid with one continuity so it's easier to manage and cut it off when the time is right before you start getting into some ridiculous territory that stems so far away from how the story and villains started off as that they might as well be their own creations.

            So you think because the original monsters got their asses exploited to the pit of the universe makes it okay that every other monster or horror icon villain gets the same treatment. But you fail to realize that all of that left to confusion amongst the story line, especially when sequels part of the same series are ignoring each other as in the case with Halloween and the endless movies in which most of which are forgettable and were a waste to make to begin with. Why risk cranking that out? There is such a thing as having too much and I prefer not to milk these cows any more than needed. Let's make room for new cows to produce their milk, new icons. HOWEVER, I'll allow for something to extend so damn long is if the story is consistent. So if Frankenstein, Dracula, and whoever kept ONE SERIES the entire way through with no retcons, reboots, and even passing the torch so we had offspring characters carry out the series, then that I can let pass. But all these different series of movies and timelines and variations of these characters? No thank you. Look at Star Wars. Over forty years and we managed to keep ONE UNIVERSE of material that passed down from one generation of characters to another and no curve ball thrown in to take us back to the beginning. If franchises were more like that, I'd be more satisfied with the movie industry.
            Moderator note:

            You are welcome and encouraged to express your opinions, but please do so without being hostile or aggressive. Do not dismiss someone's opinion; instead, politely explain why you oppose it.

            All members of our forum, including moderators, are expected to treat one another with kindness and politeness.

            Thank you.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
              Oh NO! You are NOT going to use the Frankenstein and Dracula thing to make excuses for why Michael, Freddy, and Jason should be like that. First off, those movies are from BOOKS and a book is bound to be adapted right and left until the pages all fall out. Second, most of those movies suck anyway and the endless continuities lead to mass confusion.
              I don't understand your first point. It sounds like you're saying that whatever medium is used to introduce a character dictates how that character is used in the future? Adapt book characters all you want, leave the films in one continuity. What are your thoughts on video game characters? Where do they fall into your adaptability spectrum?

              The quality of the movies has suffered down the line and continuities are broken. I'm glad we agree on something.
              The latest Halloween movie was alright, nothing special, yet it was a lot more enjoyable than Resurrection. IMO.

              Disney did kill off most (if not all?) of the books. None of it is canon, from what I've read. I'm not a Star Wars expert or anything.

              Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
              Part of me wonders if Michael, Jason, and Freddy can't be like this. Do they really need to follow one specific continuity forever, or can different people take the characters and go in their own directions with them independent of each other? Obviously, copyright issues come into play here, but for now I'm thinking from a creative standpoint.
              I think they absolutely can. If it wasn't for Disney flexing its lobbying muscle in congress every so often to keep upping the years for copyright protection, it would be a lot sooner. They can be like Dracula... or Dorothy Hale, Robin Hood, or Hercules (etc. etc.). We'll all be dead by the time they hit public domain.

              I think the Star Trek franchise has some similar problems with intellectual properties. Certain characters and/or likenesses can be used by CBS Fox, the other to Paramount. It's a mess.

              I just hope they figure this out soon, because I'd really like to see another Friday the 13th movie. We've waited long enough.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                I don't understand your first point. It sounds like you're saying that whatever medium is used to introduce a character dictates how that character is used in the future? Adapt book characters all you want, leave the films in one continuity. What are your thoughts on video game characters? Where do they fall into your adaptability spectrum?
                I'm not fond of multiple book adaptions either, but that at least makes sense to a bizarre extent that it would spawn multiple adaptions and variations; Wizard of Oz, Snow White, Cinderella, etc. Notice how many of these franchises with endless remakes/reboots/whatever are from books and the ones that aren't, like Michael, Jason, and Freddy, do not. Let those non-book creations stay just how they are as there's no need to mimic the ridiculous aspect of the ones that are book creations. Yes, leave the movies in one continuity. If the main villain or characters have ran their course, either end the series or spring off new characters to replace them. Don't restart the ride. It's like a school; students and teachers and faculty members come and go but it's the same school. We're not gonna tear the school down and start over with a new building every twenty years or so. Video game characters? They don't need to be rebooted up either. Let them have their time and grow, then retire them.
                Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                The quality of the movies has suffered down the line and continuities are broken. I'm glad we agree on something.
                The latest Halloween movie was alright, nothing special, yet it was a lot more enjoyable than Resurrection. IMO.
                Frankly, I found Resurrection to be more enjoyable than the 2018 movie. The 2018 movie is the worst to me, even lower than H20. H20 is completely trash, but what saves it is it's little use of blood and gore which is what the 2018 movie relied too much on. Very counter-proactive given the filmmakers' intent to bring back the style of the original. Also, I like H20's soundtrack more and some other elements.
                Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                Disney did kill off most (if not all?) of the books. None of it is canon, from what I've read. I'm not a Star Wars expert or anything.
                The books yes, but not the movies. I'm simply referring to the movies. A lot of the books didn't even fit together in the same continuity.
                Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                I just hope they figure this out soon, because I'd really like to see another Friday the 13th movie. We've waited long enough.
                I don't. Jason needs one more movie, another clash with Freddy and that's it. I could see there being another Freddy movie afterwards that can work as a sequel to New Nightmare where entity Freddy escapes into the real world again because that series once again retired him, but the characters find a way to permanently destroy him without making another story. You want to continue on F13, then have there be a new killer like how Jason was brought in to replace Mrs. Voorhees who was the original killer.

                Comment


                • #23
                  I could go along with the sequel set between FvJ (or JGTH) and Jason X in the timeline. We've already seen Jason meet his ultimate end after his space trip. There are a lot of stories told for just about any fictional character out there. If you count cartoons, comic books, movies, tv shows, etc. Batman has been in thousands of plots or stories. What Jason can do is limited. I mean, how many times can he mass murder a bunch of people and make it feel fresh or a new story? He drowned at a young age and has been killing people once he came back... somehow. There's at least one story there as well.

                  A joke in the 80s was, "the only thing that can kill Jason is a bad box office." Once he comes back eventually, it's just going to be about how much $$$ he brings in. That's just how it is.

                  I'm down for a good Jason movie, whatever the case. Hope this legal clusterfuck ends soon.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
                    Oh NO! You are NOT going to use the Frankenstein and Dracula thing to make excuses for why Michael, Freddy, and Jason should be like that. First off, those movies are from BOOKS and a book is bound to be adapted right and left until the pages all fall out.
                    I've never understood this argument, and I'm not sure I ever will. What does the fact that one started out as a book and another started as a movie have to do with the idea that different interpretations of these characters can be created?

                    Second, most of those movies suck anyway and the endless continuities lead to mass confusion.
                    Some of them were bad and some of them were good. Some are regarded as classics. I'll take my chances.

                    And, aren't you the one who said that people who go into these movies should make it a point to educate themselves on the history of these characters? So, let people do their homework and figure out if and how different interpretations of these characters relate to each other.

                    Something like "The Simpsons" is great because we got ONE SOLID SHOW. No cut offs, no revamps, no endless movies, just one straight ride. That's the treatment Scooby Doo should have gotten. That's the treatment these horror movies need. Keep it stable and solid with one continuity so it's easier to manage and cut it off when the time is right before you start getting into some ridiculous territory that stems so far away from how the story and villains started off as that they might as well be their own creations.
                    Actually, one of the things about The Simpsons that amuses me the most is that continuity doesn't always mean much. They've rebooted the origins of the Simpsons family more than once to explain why the characters never change or grow older. Things happen to the characters in one episode and then it's never referenced again. Part of the humor of the show is that they don't take anything too seriously, including continuity.

                    There is such a thing as having too much
                    Maybe, but I'll decide for myself when I've had enough. Right now I still want more.

                    and I prefer not to milk these cows any more than needed.
                    Again, if you're not interested in seeing any of these things don't watch them. But, those of us who are still interested should be allowed to get our fill.

                    Let's make room for new cows to produce their milk, new icons.
                    There's plenty of room for new icons, they just have to be created. Dracula and his gang didn't have to go away in order for Michael, Jason, and Freddy to make their rise to stardom, and the latter don't have to go away for new stars to be born. But, creating an icon is difficult to do. You can create new characters, but only time can tell if they'll stick in people's minds or be forgotten. The fact that Michael, Jason, and Freddy are now icons of horror wasn't pre-planned by anyone, and that process can't just be repeated on a whim.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                      I could go along with the sequel set between FvJ (or JGTH) and Jason X in the timeline.
                      Well JGTH comes before FvJ so FvJ is the better movie choice to describe a sequel after that and before Jason X unless you're talking about an individual Friday movie here where it's loosely connected to the crossover and more-so directly follows JGTH.
                      Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                      We've already seen Jason meet his ultimate end after his space trip. There are a lot of stories told for just about any fictional character out there. If you count cartoons, comic books, movies, tv shows, etc. Batman has been in thousands of plots or stories. What Jason can do is limited. I mean, how many times can he mass murder a bunch of people and make it feel fresh or a new story? He drowned at a young age and has been killing people once he came back... somehow. There's at least one story there as well.
                      Thank you! You get it. To be honest, I think they really could have spawned a series of movies featuring Uber Jason since he once again gotten a new change in character and design starting out a simple human and then a zombie and now he's a cyborg and you kinda want to see an era of him like that for a couple movies or so. But I don't mind it being short-lived. Jason's death was pretty definitive at the end of that movie burning up through the atmosphere so I think they should just leave it there, though I doubt any studio would want to follow Jason X anyway.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      I've never understood this argument, and I'm not sure I ever will. What does the fact that one started out as a book and another started as a movie have to do with the idea that different interpretations of these characters can be created?
                      I'm just pointing out that the book created characters are the ones that usually have the multiple adaptions and series. I don't know WHY that is, but it just IS and for some reason it's just more acceptable in the book case, then in the non-book case. You have a movie that's straight up original, there's just a set limitation on what you can do with that story and character.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      And, aren't you the one who said that people who go into these movies should make it a point to educate themselves on the history of these characters?
                      When it comes to understanding a sequel. It's hard to understand the characters when you're changing them up significantly and making new continuities that basically make it pointless to even watch the other ones so what exactly are you in the need to brush up on? Nothing. And it just goes to show these new incarnations might as well be their own creations.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      Actually, one of the things about The Simpsons that amuses me the most is that continuity doesn't always mean much. They've rebooted the origins of the Simpsons family more than once to explain why the characters never change or grow older. Things happen to the characters in one episode and then it's never referenced again. Part of the humor of the show is that they don't take anything too seriously, including continuity.
                      The continuity sucks but the point is, we didn't get different shows out of it like Scooby Doo, which went through like a dozen incarnations already and is about to have a new show debut next year. Ridiculous. ONE SOLID SHOW is all it needed. They kept changing the format, animation, voice actors, and it just got annoying and these shows end up being retconned anyway. At least with The Simpsons, there's only one show that's been ongoing since 1989 and despite the changes in certain characters' backstory, references and continuations to much older episodes are still bound to be made. I'm just trying to make a point mostly for the ongoing nature of the show that didn't get rebooted or turned into several other shows.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      Again, if you're not interested in seeing any of these things don't watch them. But, those of us who are still interested should be allowed to get our fill.
                      Don't give me this crap. I don't have to watch it, but it stomachs me that it exists and plaguing up a series that can do wonders without it. I hate movies that are made just to mess things up or made just to make a quick buck. There's no real heart and purpose that goes into it and it's forever going to be an entry that I'm then gonna have to acknowledge and deal with. That's not good when you want to keep things whole and pure.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      There's plenty of room for new icons, they just have to be created. Dracula and his gang didn't have to go away in order for Michael, Jason, and Freddy to make their rise to stardom, and the latter don't have to go away for new stars to be born. But, creating an icon is difficult to do. You can create new characters, but only time can tell if they'll stick in people's minds or be forgotten. The fact that Michael, Jason, and Freddy are now icons of horror wasn't pre-planned by anyone, and that process can't just be repeated on a whim.
                      Well I disagree. Dracula DID need to go away because he's had his time. He dominated the 1920s-1970s. What more did we need to see of this character? You don't see the issue here is that you're beating a dead horse and trying to give it life. Creating an icon is not really difficult to do. There's been several made this past decade alone, but they're being treated unfairly as far as proper attention is given. And even if it was difficult, that's no excuse to be long holding these older icons passed their prime that you clearly can't do anything more with them.
                      Last edited by DevonteHuntley; 11-24-2018, 04:04 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post


                        Don't give me this crap. I don't have to watch it, but it stomachs me that it exists and plaguing up a series that can do wonders without it. I hate movies that are made just to mess things up or made just to make a quick butt. There's no real heart and purpose that goes into it and it's forever going to be an entry that I'm then gonna have to acknowledge and deal with. That's not good when you want to keep things whole and pure.
                        Moderator note:

                        All forum members are encouraged to express their opinions, as long as they do it respectfully and politely.

                        If you cannot agree with someone, simply state "I'll agree to disagree." There is no need to be aggressive or hostile.


                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
                          I'm just pointing out that the book created characters are the ones that usually have the multiple adaptions and series. I don't know WHY that is, but it just IS and for some reason it's just more acceptable in the book case, then in the non-book case. You have a movie that's straight up original, there's just a set limitation on what you can do with that story and character.
                          And, my point is that maybe this way of thinking needs to be reconsidered.

                          When it comes to understanding a sequel. It's hard to understand the characters when you're changing them up significantly and making new continuities that basically make it pointless to even watch the other ones so what exactly are you in the need to brush up on? Nothing. And it just goes to show these new incarnations might as well be their own creations.
                          Well, for example, with Halloween 2018, if somebody doesn't understand how this movie relates to the others, they can look it up and clarify for themselves that it's a direct sequel to the original Halloween and ignores the other sequels.

                          I don't have to watch it, but it stomachs me that it exists and plaguing up a series that can do wonders without it. I hate movies that are made just to mess things up or made just to make a quick buck. There's no real heart and purpose that goes into it and it's forever going to be an entry that I'm then gonna have to acknowledge and deal with. That's not good when you want to keep things whole and pure.
                          You don't have to like anything if you don't want to, but you can't have everything your way. Sometimes, you have to accept the things that you have no control over and role with them. It's a lesson that I'm still learning as well, but I think I'm getting better at it. A certain amount of flexibility is good for everyone.

                          Well I disagree. Dracula DID need to go away because he's had his time. He dominated the 1920s-1970s. What more did we need to see of this character? You don't see the issue here is that you're beating a dead horse and trying to give it life. Creating an icon is not really difficult to do. There's been several made this past decade alone, but they're being treated unfairly as far as proper attention is given. And even if it was difficult, that's no excuse to be long holding these older icons passed their prime that you clearly can't do anything more with them.
                          The thing is, Dracula didn't go away. People still tell stories about him and other classic monsters to this day. And, part of the reason that they haven't gone away is because different storytellers can adapt them for different kinds of stories. They're not confined to one static reality. They can be adapted for different realities.

                          Michael, Jason, and Freddy don't have to go away either. Stories can still be told about them for those who still want them, while others tell new stories about new characters for people who want that.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Monkey View Post
                            I could go along with the sequel set between FvJ (or JGTH) and Jason X in the timeline. We've already seen Jason meet his ultimate end after his space trip. There are a lot of stories told for just about any fictional character out there. If you count cartoons, comic books, movies, tv shows, etc. Batman has been in thousands of plots or stories. What Jason can do is limited. I mean, how many times can he mass murder a bunch of people and make it feel fresh or a new story? He drowned at a young age and has been killing people once he came back... somehow. There's at least one story there as well.

                            A joke in the 80s was, "the only thing that can kill Jason is a bad box office." Once he comes back eventually, it's just going to be about how much $$$ he brings in. That's just how it is.

                            I'm down for a good Jason movie, whatever the case. Hope this legal clusterfuck ends soon.
                            I've thought about what it could be like to do a sequel or two to Jason X, and exploring the world of Earth 2. Sadly, I think that ship has long since sailed.

                            If I was going to do a sequel to Freddy vs. Jason, I would probably disregard Jason X; not because I don't like it but because I don't want to be confined by it. I don't want to have to worry about how to fit another Jason story between the end of FVJ and the beginning of JX.

                            Again, I did enjoy Jason X, but if I want to tell a Jason story that takes place in the present day (which would be impossible based on what is said and shown throughout Jason X), then that's what I'm going to do. Jason X would become more of a 'what if' story.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I think Jason X had a comic book, fanfiction feeling. It was not a movie for everyone --not even fans of the Friday the 13th franchise. Jason X was a movie for Jason fans.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                                And, my point is that maybe this way of thinking needs to be reconsidered.
                                And given how ridiculous it is for even the books to get away with it, it doesn't need to be expanded any further. Frankly the books need to stop doing it so it keeps people like you for thinking everything else can just warrant the same ridiculous train wreck of continuity messes and redos. Just make one series and one continuity and leave it at that.
                                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                                Well, for example, with Halloween 2018, if somebody doesn't understand how this movie relates to the others, they can look it up and clarify for themselves that it's a direct sequel to the original Halloween and ignores the other sequels.
                                And people still be confused with that. How many people actually do their research? I bet there's people who seen the movie who STILL is oblivious to the fact that it's a sequel to the original. That's another thing why retcons shouldn't be made. There's stupid people who live in this world and most of them watching this movie are younglings who don't know anything about continuity and what goes with what. That's not good when you're trying to tell a story and making it hard for them to keep up.
                                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                                You don't have to like anything if you don't want to, but you can't have everything your way. Sometimes, you have to accept the things that you have no control over and role with them. It's a lesson that I'm still learning as well, but I think I'm getting better at it. A certain amount of flexibility is good for everyone.
                                I have no choice but to accept them, but unlike the goofy filmmakers who make these movies and the fans who are aloof enough to support them, I still find ways to get things back to how it should be; tying up all of the movies and making something SOLID that makes it worth all the movies being made and leading up to somewhere. Like my ideas for the Halloween 2018 sequel I posted above. That is how the series should go out from here on out.
                                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                                The thing is, Dracula didn't go away.
                                And my thing is, he should have. There's really nothing different in many of these adaptions apart from the actors and story twists. There's only little things different, nothing huge so in the end it's all worthless.
                                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                                Michael, Jason, and Freddy don't have to go away either. Stories can still be told about them for those who still want them, while others tell new stories about new characters for people who want that.
                                Well then make stories about those new characters in their OWN series. Why does it need to involve icons who are passed their prime? There's nothing else you can do with them that could stretch on another century which is why it's time to retire them. People are so hell bent on their love for these icons they don't care how quality wise these movies will end up.
                                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                                If I was going to do a sequel to Freddy vs. Jason, I would probably disregard Jason X; not because I don't like it but because I don't want to be confined by it. I don't want to have to worry about how to fit another Jason story between the end of FVJ and the beginning of JX.
                                Well that's the best option if you want to tie up loose ends. You can't tie up loose ends if it means disregarding another movie or movies. I really don't like your stance on these franchises. You want to crank out so many movies that may seem unnecessary and made just to fill your belly and then you don't mind them ripping up timelines to keep things present like come on. You want a Jason movie set in the present? Well so a sequel to Jaxon X where he goes back in time to the present. It respects the continuity of the previous movie but making it so that you can still have your present aspect without totally retconning that movie so you can just skip over it like it didn't happen. The Planet of the Apes movie did this back in the 1970s. This is how writers should get around things they don't like or what time period they want such and such movie to be in. Just respect the past so that it still means something to watch those movies and that their plots still matter.
                                Last edited by DevonteHuntley; 11-28-2018, 11:33 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X