this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
11 points (78.9% liked)

movies

1697 readers
146 users here now

Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.

🔎 Find discussion threads

A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome

Related communities:

Show communities:

Discussion communities:

RULES

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.

2024 discussion threads

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Stereotype_Be@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I’m not automatically against sequels, but do we really need a sequel to a 40 year old movie?

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Idk, which is worse a remake or a delayed sequel? Or are they both on the same level?

[–] Stereotype_Be@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That’s a good question. I think I’ll take a sequel 40 years later over an awful remake that’s bound to change a lot of the original story.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

I think you're right. As an example there's the Paul Rudd Ghostbusters movies. Ok sequel, nothing really wrong with it. The second one wasn't watchable, but at least they're not trying to replace the originals.