It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Worst Third Movie of a Trilogy Series Ever(127 posts)(127 posts)
(127 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
This is my favourite topic
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Telika: Does Predators count as Predator 3 ?
Even if it did, it wouldn't count because Predators was awesome.
Posted September 14, 2012
You are biased because there were Walton Goggins' teeth in it. You have to look beyond that.
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
HereForTheBeer: For certain it was no original Die Hard...
avatar
Navagon: I can agree with that, but it beat the second one. I quite liked the second one, but it was nowhere near the first film. The third film was very different. Arguably not even really much of a sequel, but still a damn good film.
Personally, I love Die Hard 3. I hated Die Hard 2 when it came out. It seemed like just a rehash of the first movie, only set in an airport instead of a highrise. It's grown on me over the years though.

I do prefer when sequels try to do things different. Otherwise, why make a sequel at all? That's also why I don't like Alien 3. The first two movies took the two possible different approaches to the concept. The first was a psychological horror movie, there was only one alien, you didn't see it much, and the suspense lay in not knowing where it was or when it would strike. The second movie took the other approach, with aliens all over the place. Then the third movie went back and basically did the first movie again, with some stupid explanations for how Ripley could have wound up in that situation.
avatar
Telika: Does Predators count as Predator 3 ?
avatar
DProject: Even if it did, it wouldn't count because Predators was awesome.
I think I'd call it "okay" rather than "awesome". I wish they'd do a proper movie conversion of the Predator novel "Concrete Jungle" someday. That's what Predator 2 should have been.

Aliens vs Predator should have followed the novels as well. They are much better than the travesties they produced.
Post edited September 14, 2012 by Wishbone
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Navagon: I can agree with that, but it beat the second one. I quite liked the second one, but it was nowhere near the first film. The third film was very different. Arguably not even really much of a sequel, but still a damn good film.
avatar
Wishbone: Personally, I love Die Hard 3. I hated Die Hard 2 when it came out. It seemed like just a rehash of the first movie, only set in an airport instead of a highrise. It's grown on me over the years though.

I do prefer when sequels try to do things different. Otherwise, why make a sequel at all? That's also why I don't like Alien 3. The first two movies took the two possible different approaches to the concept. The first was a psychological horror movie, there was only one alien, you didn't see it much, and the suspense lay in not knowing where it was or when it would strike. The second movie took the other approach, with aliens all over the place. Then the third movie went back and basically did the first movie again, with some stupid explanations for how Ripley could have wound up in that situation.
avatar
DProject: Even if it did, it wouldn't count because Predators was awesome.
avatar
Wishbone: I think I'd call it "okay" rather than "awesome". I wish they'd do a proper movie conversion of the Predator novel "Concrete Jungle" someday. That's what Predator 2 should have been.

Aliens vs Predator should have followed the novels as well. They are much better than the travesties they produced.
My rating

Predator>Predators>Alien vs Predator>Predator 2>Alien vs Predator 2 Requiem


Edit: I notice a lot of hype from Aliens: Colonial Mariens is it gonna be good or average shovelware?
Post edited September 14, 2012 by Elmofongo
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Wishbone: I do prefer when sequels try to do things different.
I can certainly agree with that. It's just that if you rename two characters you've just got an entirely unrelated Bruce Willis action movie. Nothing wrong with that. But it's not really a sequel by any margin. They were just cashing in on the name.

Alien 3 did move back towards the first one, and Giger's original vision of the Alien (he hated the second one for turning them into cannon fodder). But I think that it does have a very different vibe to the first film and a very different tone and atmosphere. I know a lot of people don't like it but personally I consider it a good film. Even if not as good as the previous two.
Posted September 14, 2012
XMen 3 and Alien 3 ugh. Those both made me angry for watching them. They both undid everything accomplished with the previous movies.
Posted September 14, 2012
There is no actual Matrix 3 though. There's only Matrix 2 consisting of two parts, so i'm not so sure if this movie actually fits the "third movie from a series".

Anyway Sam Raimi's Spiderman 3 wasn't all that bad, i actually liked the movie, but what he did with the villains was plain awful. First there was superdumb and unlikable Sandman and then there was a skinny and whiney parody of a beefed up linespitting Venom from the comic books.
Post edited September 14, 2012 by XYCat
Posted September 14, 2012
I was gutted by The Dark Knight Rises. What the fuck is up with Nolan and fight choreography? He makes no attempt to understand it. and pacing, jesus christ..I dunno, so much wrong with that movie. Loved the first two though.
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Wishbone: I do prefer when sequels try to do things different.
avatar
Navagon: I can certainly agree with that. It's just that if you rename two characters you've just got an entirely unrelated Bruce Willis action movie. Nothing wrong with that. But it's not really a sequel by any margin. They were just cashing in on the name.

Alien 3 did move back towards the first one, and Giger's original vision of the Alien (he hated the second one for turning them into cannon fodder). But I think that it does have a very different vibe to the first film and a very different tone and atmosphere. I know a lot of people don't like it but personally I consider it a good film. Even if not as good as the previous two.
I'll go all out and say Alien 3 is my favorite in the series.
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
HereForTheBeer: What can I say? We didn't like it. It was okay until the movie got to the water-puzzle thing with the briefcase (if memory serves) and at that point my mind went "Meh". For certain it was no original Die Hard...
avatar
SCPM: Every sequel to Die Hard was actually made from other scripts where they just changed the characters at the last minute.
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/die-hard/21313/the-strange-history-of-the-die-hard-movies
But did YOU know that the Sega arcade game 'Die Hard Arcade' was just a Japanese game called 'Dynamite Deka' with the Die Hard license slapped on it too?
http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=711&gid=1984#1984
Kinda fitting really...
Post edited September 14, 2012 by Fever_Discordia
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: I watched the Matrix 3 just recently and I thought it was great just as good as the first 2 honestly is the philosiphy of the movie more important then the plot

And also Terminator 3 was great aswell salvation ruined everything

come on how can you not like the scene with the coffen full of weapons
Yes, the only reason why all the stuff in the Matrix was cool was the philosophical aspect of it. Otherwise you just have a bunch of hipsters in black leather and sunglasses blasting each other for the entire length of the move.The whole plot of the movie surrounds the question.

BTW, the Matrix was a wonderful movie, it's a shame they never made any sequels.

https://xkcd.com/566/
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: I watched the Matrix 3 just recently and I thought it was great just as good as the first 2 honestly is the philosiphy of the movie more important then the plot

And also Terminator 3 was great aswell salvation ruined everything

come on how can you not like the scene with the coffen full of weapons
avatar
hedwards: Yes, the only reason why all the stuff in the Matrix was cool was the philosophical aspect of it. Otherwise you just have a bunch of hipsters in black leather and sunglasses blasting each other for the entire length of the move.The whole plot of the movie surrounds the question.

BTW, the Matrix was a wonderful movie, it's a shame they never made any sequels.

https://xkcd.com/566/
I notice you guys say there are no sequals what kind of meme is this?
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: I watched the Matrix 3 just recently and I thought it was great just as good as the first 2 honestly is the philosiphy of the movie more important then the plot
avatar
Jaime: The philosophy is a bucket of shit. The Matrix is one of those two-faced works without any integrity that all too often end up extremely popular. I can get behind a movie about emotionless badasses battling each other, and behind one that portrays a group of frail but brave humans fighting against soulless machines, but the Matrix films are about sunglasses and trenchcoat wearing ultracool stars holding up the ideal of humanity... doesn't that strike anyone else as silly?
If that's your synopsis of the movie, I recommend you go back and watch it again. And pay attention to the philosophical aspects of it.

The philosophy is what drives the movie and it's why there was only one Matrix film and not a series of several of them. It deals with a pretty fundamental aspect of reality, namely how do we know that we're seeing reality.

In case of point, everything you see, hear, do, taste and whatnot, no longer exists. Mainly because we all live a tiny fraction of a second in the past, so what we think is happening has already happened and effectively no longer exists. The main reason is that it takes time for the brain to process information and it would be bad if something tapped our toe and our finger at the same time and it wasn't perceived as being simultaneous. But, nerves do take time to transmit feelings to the brain.

What's more it deals with the implications of realty being a construct of ones own imagination.

Now, you might not like the movie, but let's not pretend like it's a "bucket of shit", because it's not. It was a well planned and well executed movie which survives today on it's merits. As opposed to V for Vendetta which has the same effects, but ultimately doesn't work very well at all.
avatar
Elmofongo: I notice you guys say there are no sequals what kind of meme is this?
We say that because there were no further movies. The Matrix was busted up and Neo went flying through the air because he could do whatever he pleased.

Also, click the link.
Post edited September 14, 2012 by hedwards
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Jaime: The philosophy is a bucket of shit. The Matrix is one of those two-faced works without any integrity that all too often end up extremely popular. I can get behind a movie about emotionless badasses battling each other, and behind one that portrays a group of frail but brave humans fighting against soulless machines, but the Matrix films are about sunglasses and trenchcoat wearing ultracool stars holding up the ideal of humanity... doesn't that strike anyone else as silly?
avatar
hedwards: If that's your synopsis of the movie, I recommend you go back and watch it again. And pay attention to the philosophical aspects of it.

The philosophy is what drives the movie and it's why there was only one Matrix film and not a series of several of them. It deals with a pretty fundamental aspect of reality, namely how do we know that we're seeing reality.

In case of point, everything you see, hear, do, taste and whatnot, no longer exists. Mainly because we all live a tiny fraction of a second in the past, so what we think is happening has already happened and effectively no longer exists. The main reason is that it takes time for the brain to process information and it would be bad if something tapped our toe and our finger at the same time and it wasn't perceived as being simultaneous. But, nerves do take time to transmit feelings to the brain.

What's more it deals with the implications of realty being a construct of ones own imagination.

Now, you might not like the movie, but let's not pretend like it's a "bucket of shit", because it's not. It was a well planned and well executed movie which survives today on it's merits. As opposed to V for Vendetta which has the same effects, but ultimately doesn't work very well at all.
avatar
Elmofongo: I notice you guys say there are no sequals what kind of meme is this?
avatar
hedwards: We say that because there were no further movies. The Matrix was busted up and Neo went flying through the air because he could do whatever he pleased.

Also, click the link.
i did before i wrote my reply

heh breaks the pills and snorts them both in his nose lol
Posted September 14, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: i did before i wrote my reply

heh breaks the pills and snorts them both in his nose lol
It's the bottom set of panels at the bottom of the page just above the navigation buttons..
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Worst Third Movie of a Trilogy Series Ever(127 posts)(127 posts)
(127 posts)