Privately owned studios should all be run at a loss as a point of pride among the wealthy. “Oh, you’re funding a popular film? For profit? How embarrassing for you.”
[edit] I misinterpreted the intent of this comment to mean the complete opposite - the person I am replying to is NOT saying that there’s no sequel because Hollywood is risk averse so my first paragraph is arguing a point they’re not making, my bad
I agree with the statement but I feel like you have it backwards. Introducing a new cast and story is a risk, remaking or filming a sequel of a beloved movie is the safe bet they keep falling back on.
Maybe I’m in the minority here but I’m content that there’s no sequel to District 9. The story was told well and had a proper ending. I loved the characters and world building but I don’t need another story set there unless it was planned that way from the start.
Maybe it’d be good. I’d love to be wrong. I’ve just been burned way too many times by hamfisted sequels to get excited anymore - especially when the original came out as long as this one
I interpreted your comment in the context of this post to mean you thought there wasn’t a sequel to District 9 because Hollywood didn’t want to take the risk
Nah, I’m coming down hard on sequels for their own sake. I only really want to see a sequel to anything if the writer has something to say. With some sequels the point of the thing is the spectacle itself (looking at you, John Wick), so that’s alright I guess. There’s room for sequels, but it has to have some reason to exist beyond bankability.
Yesterday was a good Lemmy day for me. I had another great series of conversations on another post with people I didn’t agree with and everyone was respectful of each other’s opinions.
Ooh my bad, then we are absolutely on the same page. There’s plenty of good sequels but the majority are worse than the original (in my opinion at least)
You nailed it with the last sentence. Some sequels are made for the love of it and that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re good films BUT the cashgrab films almost never are.
It’s a shame the spotlight is being monopolized by big studios doing reboots and sequels in an age of democratized creative tools and access. Indie and low budget should be having a renaissance. There’s some good stuff coming out of Bollywood too now.
One of my favorite movies I watched recently was Anyone Else But Me by Joel Haver and it only had a $4000 budget. A good script and good actors go such a long way
After a quick look, it sounds like something really special. I’ll have to give it a look, thanks!
Currently really trying to make time to watch Late Night With The Devil. It’s hard to find time for stuff like that with so much kids’ media in my diet.
I would trade six monkey paws for Hollywood to stop being so risk averse
But that’s where all the rich people pour their money dude
WON’T SOMEONE THINK ABOUT THE RICH PEOPLE 😂
Privately owned studios should all be run at a loss as a point of pride among the wealthy. “Oh, you’re funding a popular film? For profit? How embarrassing for you.”
Folly Studios
[edit] I misinterpreted the intent of this comment to mean the complete opposite - the person I am replying to is NOT saying that there’s no sequel because Hollywood is risk averse so my first paragraph is arguing a point they’re not making, my bad
I agree with the statement but I feel like you have it backwards. Introducing a new cast and story is a risk, remaking or filming a sequel of a beloved movie is the safe bet they keep falling back on.Maybe I’m in the minority here but I’m content that there’s no sequel to District 9. The story was told well and had a proper ending. I loved the characters and world building but I don’t need another story set there unless it was planned that way from the start.
Maybe it’d be good. I’d love to be wrong. I’ve just been burned way too many times by hamfisted sequels to get excited anymore - especially when the original came out as long as this one
I agree with everything you said, so I’m not sure what I’ve got backwards ?
I interpreted your comment in the context of this post to mean you thought there wasn’t a sequel to District 9 because Hollywood didn’t want to take the risk
Nah, I’m coming down hard on sequels for their own sake. I only really want to see a sequel to anything if the writer has something to say. With some sequels the point of the thing is the spectacle itself (looking at you, John Wick), so that’s alright I guess. There’s room for sequels, but it has to have some reason to exist beyond bankability.
deleted by creator
Yesterday was a good Lemmy day for me. I had another great series of conversations on another post with people I didn’t agree with and everyone was respectful of each other’s opinions.
Yeah I think that’s how people normally act, the toxic online dynamic is hardly inevitable, like we’re evolving into crabs or something
Ooh my bad, then we are absolutely on the same page. There’s plenty of good sequels but the majority are worse than the original (in my opinion at least)
You nailed it with the last sentence. Some sequels are made for the love of it and that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re good films BUT the cashgrab films almost never are.
It’s a shame the spotlight is being monopolized by big studios doing reboots and sequels in an age of democratized creative tools and access. Indie and low budget should be having a renaissance. There’s some good stuff coming out of Bollywood too now.
One of my favorite movies I watched recently was Anyone Else But Me by Joel Haver and it only had a $4000 budget. A good script and good actors go such a long way
After a quick look, it sounds like something really special. I’ll have to give it a look, thanks!
Currently really trying to make time to watch Late Night With The Devil. It’s hard to find time for stuff like that with so much kids’ media in my diet.
(instead of editing it, Lemmy decided to post my edited comment as a separate comment and I just deleted it. Sorry for pinging your inbox!)