That is a shame, too, because I actually liked The Mummy. In fact, I have it on 4K Blu-Ray. It's crazy that the film made over $400 million worldwide and was still regarded as a failure. It's not nearly as good as the 1999 adaptation, but I enjoyed it and really would've liked to have seen the Dark Universe idea continue.
@@sorenpx The issue was the marketing + the cost overruns. The director, Alex Kurtzman, basically admitted he didn't know what he was doing, so things took longer - and every extra day can add six or seven figures.
Bay wanted it all to end, but the studio didn't. Currently, the studio doesn't, but the money is now confetti! It's no longer there. It's sad, but they're worse things that can happen.
We fooled ourselves into being okay with Force Awakens, but half of us utterly hated Last Jedi and the other half hated Rise of Skywalker. Stay away from the words Rise and Last, lol.
I still want to try to remain optimistic for the future lol. Though how long it's gonna be is anyones guess. I don't think I've seen such expensive movies get delayed so much before.
I didn’t like Force Awakens when it came out. While I was watching it in the theatres, I realized it was A New Hope and I could predict most of what came next.
I liked the force awakens until the rose tinted glasses came off and I realized it was just a new hope but worse. Didn't watch tlj in theaters and I have not and will not ever watch the rise of Skywalker.
There are parts of The Last Jedi that I think are fine, but are surrounded by other parts that REALLY don’t work (obviously). What it needed was a whole sequence of the film covering the relationship between Luke and Ben-think the long flashback sequence in Crouching Tiger that reveals a whole other story happening beneath the main story which also enriches it. We needed to see Luke and Ben grow their relationship, then the falling the apart, so we’d care about it. I don’t even dislike Luke being jaded at the start of TLJ, because we could have seen his struggling faith in being “the last jedi” trying to bring them back from the dead, and Ben being the one, but having psychological struggles with the burden of “being the one”, with his knowledge of how wrong it can go (Vader being a known historical figure now) and questioning his own capability AND sacrificing his whole life to have to serve something he maybe doesn’t fully have faith in himself. Then it would make more sense for Luke to doubt Ben and himself, and Ben doubts himself and increasingly doubts the Jedi for their past failures, as well as the last of them positioning someone who doesn’t believe in himself to be its new champion, a disaster waiting to happen which he sees but Luke is blinded to because he can’t accept Ben would fall the way Vader did. The pressure Luke feels that leads him to deny the ticking time bomb would be the fact that he is the last one (he is aware of), meaning if he fails that’s it-failure isn’t an option, and he unintentionally ends up in a situation where his reasons for bringing the Jedi back just to bring them back, rather than solely to serve as paragons of “balance” and all that. Thus, we watch the relationship erode into some great dual betrayal that never needed to happen but it due to the complex circumstances. This would have complicated Luke’s reluctance with Rey in interesting ways that allow for each of these key characters to progress toward narrative revelations more naturally and in a way we’d actually care about.
That's why the box office collapsed lol. It's actually odd - for a movie that's part of such a big franchise, and had such a high budget, it kind of flew under the radar - mostly because I think people had gotten tired of the franchise. Bad movie + exhaustion = iced.
The Star Wars prequels made the Star Wars even more popular than ever before. I thought that hating the Prequels (which I never ever hated) was beyond outdated.
I think it's always worth considering whether or not the hate is real or just vocal. It might just be the people I know or quarters I go to, but Star Wars just has a much more intense fanbase than others. Maybe it also exists for Lord of the Rings, which is the series I enjoy the most, but if it does, I've not noticed it.
Only thing outdated is the CGI in the prequels. The prequels are all horrible. The last of the three just a bit less then the first two. Badly written, poorly directed and full of horrible acting (mostly due to to bad writing and poor directing). I would rather watch any of the sequels 5 times than watch any of prequels once.
This was during the transition from film to digital and Lucas was a lot more experimental with them with regards to the tech involved, so I think makes sense that the CG I is pretty rough compared to now. We're at nigh-photorealism levels at this point.
@@tumppuman OT fanboys are so predictable. “Badly written”? That’s the universal code for “I have no idea what I’m talking about, but I’m gonna talk anyway.” The Prequels are objectively the best-written Star Wars movies. But let’s address the elephant in the room: hating something for 40 years and still showing up to announce your hatred like it’s breaking news? The fact that it angers you that people like something that you hate. That is a psychotic-level of obsession; one that all OT fanboys seem to share.
Rotten Tomatoes is full of bs ratings. There's really no point in comparing ratings on it. I prefer IMDb, however since Rings of power debacle, even IMDb has been unreliable, at least for modern media. For old movies and tv, it still is quite alright.
I think it depends on what you use them for. I always use Rotten Tomatoes as a consensus barometer - that is 75% for me doesn't mean 7.5/10, but rather 3/4 people said the movie is a fine watch, which is pretty solid. iMDB I never really got into after I found out Shawshank was number 1 on the top 250 list. It's a fine movie, to be sure, but not deserving of top 10 or top 50 or even top 100 let alone first place. Letterboxd, which I use for my own tracking, is fine enough. Most movies seem to trend towards 2-3/5, which is where most should be. There are very few 5/5s or 1/5s.
@@Syntopikon Rotten Tomatoes is filled with paid reviews that it even became a story. But you don't mind because you prefer the narrative they give you. You don't care.
@@henrytownsend4869 I've no doubt there're paid reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, but why would I waste any time figuring out what percentage of reviews are paid for?
Here's a perspective on IMDb ratings. Higher ratings don't mean a movie is better, it just means that the majority of people who watched and voted it liked it very much, on a scale of 1-10. Like the Shawshank Redemption might not be the best movie but it's nearly universally liked very much by those who watched it. In this sense, IMDb seems to represent users preferences more finely than RT, because RT doesn't care about the scale rating of a movie, but takes account of just a positive or negative reception of it and calculates percentage of positives. But that's the problem with IMDb too especially for modern movies which can be easily review bombed or easily overrated, just like on RT.
Perhaps killing off John Conner in the first 10 minutes of your film Tim and James is why it failed. Not to mention so they stopped Skynet at the end of T2. But it just so happens another AI called Legion who is basically the same thing and looks exactly the same happens to take over. And the film pretty much copies the exact same beats of the first two films. Not to mention what they did to Sarah Conner and Arnolds Terminator. How in the hell did neither of them. But especially James not understand that this movie was an absolute spit in the face to fans of the franchise. Man these people are out of touch.
It's kind of telling that of them, Cameron is the only one that's willing to come back at this point lol Maybe, if he's in the directors chair, it might turn out different?
@@Syntopikon I mean I don't know what he would have done differently to Dark Fate. Two he's busy making 5 more Avatar films. Which those films do nothing for me. Despite loving his other classics. Not to mention his age, 70. At this point it's time to let it die.
I think he intends to go the Ridley Scott + Clint Eastwood way of directing into his 90s lol I believe he's also developing an adaptation of a book, Ghosts of Hiroshima. I think that's after Avatar 3. I do enjoy the Avatar films, especially from the tech side of things. Epic movies - or movies of scale - do a particular wonder for me on the big screen. I can understand how others don't like them, though. Of my friends and family, I think I might be the only fan lol
I think the issue with the DCEU ended up being Avengers. They saw how that pulled $1.5 billion and decided that they needed to skip the years of ground work and just throw the Justice League together. I think if they took on a 5 year plan, 1-2 movies a year, they could've built up to something wonderful.
Great video as always, there's so much to talk about with each of these franchises. But yeah as you said it is all about maintaining and taking care of it liek a plant or it'll wither away. For me the Terminator series is the one that hurts the most as I kept hoping for something good especially with Salvation and Dark Fate. Salvation was a great idea and had some great moments, but the story and visual style needed to be handled by a more distinctive director. And Dark Fate I enjoyed more than Genisys (which put me to sleep), but unfortunately it was another case not having great execution and coming after the previous entries.
Glad you liked it! Yup, maintaining it is the most difficult thing. You don't want to give it to much sunlight or water or too little. The issue is figuring out the right amount. Terminator might have another life if Cameron is able to do it the way he wants, though it's up in the air. Still, I like to remain hopeful.
Christmas is coming around, and another franchise that was ruined was Home Alone. A lot of people don't like Home Alone 3 (but personally, I did like it) because of no connection to the McCalister's and, of course, no Kevin or Harry & Marv. Macaulay Culkin didn't want to do Home Alone 3 due to being too old for the role of Kevin McCalister and he had other projects in his sleeve from The Good Son to Richie Rich. Then, after that there was two tv Home Alone movies (which are 4 and 5) but lastly in 2021 Home Sweet Home Alone was a reboot but had little connections to the McCalister's with Buzz being a cop and mentioning Kevin from years ago of being "Home Alone". Which Home Sweet Home Alone didn't make any sense at all to be made. So after Home Alone 2 for many people, the franchise was ruined.
I did not even like Home Alone 2, though it certainly is much, much better than any of the sequels that followed it. So for me, there never has been a Home Alone franchise. There's just the first film. (That said, I don't think I've seen Home Alone 2 since it was first released. Maybe I should give it another chance.)
Yup, the Home Alone series would most certainly qualify here. I recall that I saw parts of 3, but I don't think I ever finished it. Home Alone 2, while not a perfect film, is a near enough perfect holiday film, so it's got a special place in my heart.
@@sorenpx I think you should. Home Alone 2 still has a lot of heart in it. While it is pretty much the first film, the fish out of water - Kevin in New York - element is a good change.
@@Syntopikon I guess I'll have to do it then. I've been looking for stuff to watch this Christmas that I haven't seen a thousand times anyway. While I did enjoy some of the new theatrical Christmas films (The Best Christmas Pageant Ever and Red One were both enjoyable for me), all of the new streaming efforts look like total garbage.
I preferred Genesis over Dark Fate . While it wasn’t perfect, it still wrapped up the story decently, while I felt Dark Fate copied all the others and brought nothing new.
Therein lies the biggest and most obvious issue when it comes to franchises: when should one stop and let the franchise take a breath? I'm not one of those people that think one shouldn't make sequels, or even a bunch. Zatoichi proves that not only can you make a bunch of movies in a series, but a bunch of good ones. But with how expensive and oxygen-hogging American productions are, a long gestation period would be helpful. Then, when continuing, while it might be helpful to have the original creator on board in some capacity, fresh, new voices should take the lead.
@@scrystine If they had managed to make a sequel to Genisys where the whole point was that the parents of John Connor try to make sure he doesn't end up the way he did in Genisys, and then maybe that they can't stop the war from happening and there was a third movie where we finally see that war properly, and in the end John Connor gets control of the time machine early enough that he can reset the whole past of his time line to what happened in the first ever movie, I think it might have worked. But I agree that Genisys was not well done - at the very least they should have shown John Connor at least trying to fight what had taken him over, and his future parents maybe concentrating more on trying to save him after they found out, earlier than they did in that movie, even if they maybe fail in the end - and the actors for Sarah Connor and especially Kyle Reese were miscast. Have to say that the one thing I have been most disappointed with that franchise is that we never got to properly see John Connor as the adult badass leader, and as the main character in his own movie. The only one that tried that is Salvation, and even in that he is more of a supporting character, and is not the leader he was supposed to be yet. I just can't figure out why they went that way, the logical direction would have been a proper war film just showing how Connor either is already the leader, or how he first gets to that position and then devises a plan that gets humans the victory.
Is very annoying because all these reboots, sequels and spinoffs are so bad and/or unnecessary, that it takes the magic away from the original movie and waters down the quality of the story. Let golden movies die in piece for eternal glory, not milk them incessantly and turn into dumb zombies. Legacy > Milking.
The allure of a billion dollars is hard to resist, though. Sequels - even after a long time - can be done well. I thought Top Gun: Maverick was a great movie and one of my favorites of the 2020s so far. But it gestated for a long time - it was in development longer than all of the sequels combined. But it didn't try to do spectacular things - though the aerial sequences were spectacular. It tackled relevant ideas: aging, grief, mentorship, competition. The "bad guys", inasmuch as they exist, were sideshows to the characters, who took center stage. To top it off, it was excellently made and deserving of its many rewatches. It's a sequel that, I think, outstripped its predecessor.
@Syntopikon have to agree on this one 👌🏼 absolutely. Top Gun Maverick is a great sequel. But it is different from milking an IP. 1 sequel is fine, whether it is good or bad, worth the try if the plot of the movie allows a logical continuation and builds over (not copy) the first one. A trilogy is only good if the second movie was good. Beyond that your name is MI: Tom Cruise (good), or Fast and Furious (not good). Sometimes I believe intention is key, Top Gun Maverick wasn't created to catapult a franchise, as Tron Legacy was to, and the latter just could not, despite long development. Loved the movie, but lacked something.
This likely will be an unpopular opinion, but the greatest Star Wars movie of all time is in fact one of the prequels: Revenge of the Sith. If all the prequels had been as good as that entry, the prequels undoubtedly would've been much better received, but at least the trilogy goes out on a high note. As for the DCEU, I would really like to know what the result would've been if the franchise had never been handed over to Zack Snyder. The tone that he set with Man of Steel was just not right. Too dark, too gloomy, too cynical. Personally, I did like Aquaman and Wonder Woman, which were among the more upbeat, fun entries in the franchise, though I do have to say that I think Batman v Superman is a better film than it's usually given credit for.
One thing you notice on Rotten Tomatoes is that each of the prequels actually seemed to get better reviews than the prior one, so you might be right with RotS. Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Shazam, and Blue Beetle were, I think, the highlights and are the tone that most of the movies should have had. But I agree about the dark, gloomy, and cynical tone for Man of Steel. That's just not Superman - it's truth, justice, and the American Way, with plenty of hope thrown it. Snyder's style across all of his films is just much darker and while it works for something like Watchmen or 300, this just isn't the place for it. It's the one thing I'd like to see James Gunn get right.
@@Syntopikon I still haven't seen Blue Beetle. I may have to check it out. I think I'm kind of over superhero movies for a while though, especially with some of the poor decisions that both Marvel and DC have made in the last few years. And I do hope you're right about Gunn and that he's able to successfully bring Superman back to his roots and also come up with a story that is fitting.
Blue Beetle was more fun, and had more heart, than most of the other superhero movies. It's still very DC-like, but its one of their best, and one that deserved a better release than it got.
The Star Wars prequels were my first experience of Star Wars, so i loved them at the time. Still enjoy Episode 3 now. They still felt like Star Wars. I think Disney era just didn't feel like it to me. Also i forgot there was a 4th Men in Black movie. The third one was pretty decent. But the franchise is nothing without Will Smith in it, so not surprised the latest one flopped. I was a huge fan of the Fox Xmen movies. Its sad how disappointing it ended with Dark Phoenix. I kinda wish they just stopped at 'Days of Future Past', which was perfect.
Happy to hear that you enjoyed them. I think peoples gateway to Star Wars usually ends up being their favorite. It's why, as much as I do enjoy the movies, Knights of the Old Republican is still my favorite Star Wars thing made so far. Yeah, Will Smith - and Tommy Lee Jones, it must be said - have some of the best on screen chemistry I've ever seen. Jones as the straight man, Smith as the hotshot - it works wildly well. Dark Phoenix ended up being the only X-Men movie I didn't see in theaters (from the time I started going to the movies). Apocalypse was that disappointing for. Days of Future Past would've been an excellent stopping point, after which they could've rebooted.
MMW James Gunn is going to mess up DC just as bad as Zack Snyder. I hated, hated, hated GotG 3. So much animal torture. James Gunn with total power is gonna be unwatchable by most audiences.
Did this dude just say that some scene in a transformers sequel was one of the best things ever put on film? Jesus Christ man, I’ve never stopped a video so fast. Leapt outta my chair like I was riding … Grimlock? WTF…
Optimus riding Grimlock is pure cinema. It's one of those things that needs no dialogue, no narrative, maybe not even any music. It's absolutely kinetic and conveys all it needs to in the action. A lot of Bay's work is like that, at least for me.
The text crawl. "...A trade embargo over a dispute about taxation to outlying star systems..." Since when is a children's movie suddenly C - Span... Iiiiiiinnnnn SssssppppAaaaaaaaace!!!!
How Lucas deflects criticism for the star wars prequels' is hilariously shallow because of all the space politic talks that will fly over any kid's head. Also he's implying kids movies can't have great acting, characters and writing. Third time was the charm imo as episode 3 finally felt like the best of star wars to me, aka episodes 4 and 5
I'm reading through The Star Wars Archives Episodes 1-3, by Paul Duncan. Lucas was writing the script in the wake of the Republican Revolution in the late mid-90s, which apparently stuck with him (Nute Gunray's name's inspired by Newt Gingrich and Ronald Reagan - he had also sued the Reagan Administration over using the "Star Wars" name for the missile defense system that was talked about).
21st Century audiences should thank the Hollywood studios of 80-90 years ago. If they operated like the creatively barren Hollywood of today, we'd be awaiting the release of Boy's Town 87, G-Men 91, and The 103rd Night At The Opera.
it felt like the people behind the The Last Knight were so done with the series and the message was clear wth the box-office that the audience were getting sick of that style.
It was a new team that hadn't worked on the movies before. They should've gotten the same screenwriter/story guy they had on Dark and Age. The movies weren't great, but they both clocked more than a billion. Also, they shouldn't have had the Knights of the Round Table angle. It was way out of place.
It's kind of wild that Dark of the Moon & Age of Extinction made as much as they did. I still enjoy rewatching the older ones and I know for a fact that if they do another, I'm gonna be there opening weekend lol
I like the Star Wars prequels I prefer over the sequels but I’m not going to pretend that the prequels didn’t garner a lot of hate when they first came out because they did but I feel like they have gone better with the passage of time and are far more appreciated now then they were back then
I think that's what happens for a lot of movies. Times heals all wounds and movies that were castigated at the time get reappraised. The Night of the Hunter is a famous example: decried on release, now considered one of the best movies ever made.
From my experience the only people who really hate the Star Wars Prequels are those who either grew up with the Original Trilogy, or those who had their opinions shaped by someone who grew up with the Original Trilogy. As someone who was 9 years old when Episode 1 came out; I remember being on the playground and talking about it with my group of friends. I specifically remember this one friend of mine wouldn't stfu about how cool he thought seeing C3P0 without his metal plating blew his little 9 year old mind away. I saw each one in theaters with my friends; we bought tickets to Episode 3 three times. But we were the age group these movies were made for; you know, just like how the Original Trilogy was made for 12 year olds back in 1977. The first time I ever heard about "Prequel Hate" was when I was in High School and it was from a new "geek" teacher fresh out of college and he wouldn't stfu about; which was annoying af.
By the time the Last Knight came out people had moved on from the transformers into the MCU and Star Wars. It was just a horrible movie even worse than Revenge of the Fallen. At least Bumblebee and Transformers One are good. DC should just taken care by Paul Dini and Bruce Timm, this guys understand better than anybody else the characters and storytelling. I blame the failure of fantastic beasts to the reboot show of Harry potter, if they had done better financially and critically it would never lead to that decision. X-Men Dark Phoenix is alongside X-Men origins and new mutants the worst in the series, miserable. I can get through the mediocrity of the last stand and apocalypse but this three killed the franchise. Glad it got the send off with Deadpool 3!
It's a bit wild just how much Transformers collapsed from 4 to 5 - pretty much half the gross. Dini & Timm would've been could choices. I'll forever be grateful to them for their animated work - JL, JLU, and Batman/Superman TAS are some of my favorites. Dino also made Tower Prep for Cartoon Network in 2010, which I enjoyed.
@Syntopikon the way TLJ sets up some new ideas are intriguing to me at least, like how Rey's parents are nobody and the broom kid in the end implies that the force is something that everyone can have, i can understand if fans didn't like it though
Right on. Stan Lee used to say that "Every comic is someone's first." That applies here, too, I think - every movie, franchise or not, is either someone's first or favorite. I suppose that's also the hardest thing - making something that resonates with fans as well as not.
The prequels are still just so horribly bad. They came out around my informative years. I was so bored during all 3 of them, that my dad had to wake me up a few times because I kept falling asleep during RotS. Even 2/3 decades later I find the prequels awful, and while I think the sequels overall are decent and better than the prequels (especially TLJ) What should have been my OT experience came in 2001, when PJ released his magnum opus, his masterpiece. Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring.
@ it’s a tradition in my house to either watch them once a month or if they happen to be rereleased in theaters go at least thrice to all 3 movies. One of my biggest flexes is going to 2 Jackson extended marathons (both Hobbit and Rings back to back) back to back, without falling asleep
How did The Hobbit movies stack up for you? There were changes that didn't make sense, though, on the whole, I had a good time watching all three. Nowhere near the LOTR trilogy, but enough that I got them on 4K and still rewatch them from time to time.
@ I thought they were okay, I lowered my expectations for those because they were based on The Hobbit, a children’s book that wasn’t exactly deeply rooted in lore
Definitely. I'm working on writing a video about video games that were in development hell for a long time, as well as one on the history of video game & movie adaptations (which I think I enjoy more than most, even if they end up doing terribly). Hoping to get at least one of those out next month!
Those are 3 interesting cases. None of them did spectacularly well financially (though I don't think they lost money), but all got decent enough reviews. Still, it's been 8 years since Beyond.
Let's be honest most of these franchises, save perhaps, Indiana Jones would be jokes and flops, if they hadn't embedded themselves in our grey matter as children
I think that's usually how it goes, though. The things we like as children are also what we tend to like as adults. There's more time - and penchant - to explore realms of fantasy and sci-fi then, as opposed to later on.
I'm pretty sure the Disney Star Wars production line are basically just trolling fans of the original Lucas tirlogy: the palpable contempt for the source material and low opinion of the audience practically oozes off the screen.
It’s one of the big issues when it comes to revamping a franchise. In trying to please fans and newcomers, they ended up pleasing few. They should’ve gone all in or gone for a clean break.
The prequels were so hated that Lucas just gave up. He could’ve kept even just an advisory role on the sequels, but he decided “nah, let Disney and Kathleen take all the hate I used to get.” And it’s worked well, because now the fans all want him back, even though it seems highly unlikely. He can just relax on his ranch with his 4 billion dollars and watch the franchise he created continue its cycle of commercial success (for the most part) yet constant receptive disaster.
I, unironically and fervently, would like him to make one more Star Wars movie. Like I mentioned in the video, others feel far more strongly about the prequels and sequels than I do and while I like some more than others, I don't feel like I wasted money on any of them. But Lucas went like 22 years between directing Star Wars and Phantom Menace, and we're up on 20 years between Revenge of the Sith and now. If Disney really wants to give the franchise a shot in the arm, I think Lucas could do it (irrespective of what the final movie turns out like - mostly just a last hurrah).
@ I just want him to do one last movie in general. But his heart hasn’t truly been in directing since 1977. After all, he only ever directed the prequel trilogy because everyone he asked, from Ron Howard to Spielberg, went “no George, only you can do this one”
Yup. Directing one Star Wars movie was enough to burn him out on directing for 20+ years lol. He's mentioned that directing (or writing) was never really his jam, and something he did because he had stories he wanted to tell but either not enough money for other directors, or no takers for the job.
Lucas saying that "Star wars is a kids movie, has always been a kids movie" is correct. The problem is that its fans are adults. Adults in the modern sense, meaning of emotionally children with larger bodies, not an adult,let's say, in the sense of world war II veteran. Most adults in the western world are essentially children. This has been the case for several decades now. It makes it very hard to Target a demographic for a film that was unveiled in the seventies and is still trying to make money now
Interestingly, though, Disney moved something like a billion dollars worth of merchandise within a few days in 2015 as it got closer to Force Awakens release. I think the franchise has popularity, but they're having a lot of difficulty connecting with the people. Now, the Carter years were quite fraught and Lucas specifically wanted something that was optimistic, that people look up to and really relish. So I'm wondering if a return to form is what would be necessary for todays world.
I was 9 back in '77 when Star Wars as it was then called came out, and wow did it enthrall us. Since then I have seen the prequels they were passable at best and the sequels which in my opinion are garbage!! I did enjoy Rouge one though, Solo not as much. So while I don't agree with "most adults" in the western world being kids I do agree with Star Wars as a kids franchise. So as an adult I don't love this franchise anymore. As for the TV shows they are all a pile of Disney RUBBISH.
@@TheTonyahawk Do you think the differentiation is that when you enjoy something as a kid, there's something that's more, for lack of a better word, magical about it. I know that, for me, I read Lord of the Rings very young, and saw the movies when I was quite young as well. I've never seen anything that could live up to them, and I know that they're masterpieces of storytelling. But I'm curious whether or not I would feel that same way if I saw them when I was in my teens or twenties?
@@Syntopikon Absolutely!! When a property such as Star Wars or LOTR has such an impact on you as a child you tend too look back at it with nostalgic eyes. I read LOTR in the 3rd grade and loved the books I found Peter Jackson's films to be satisfying for me. The Star Wars sequels while not tarnishing the OGs for me now as an adult were a huge disappointment in the way they treated the characters, especially Luke. I saw Halloween in Nov '78 and was as enthralled with it as Star Wars, but the main difference is I still liked the newer films for better or worse, I guess that as adults our ideas change. Ultimately watching Stars Wars at 8 (I turned 9 in August) was expected at that age watching Halloween at 10 in 1978 was taboo and the impact of it has never tarnished.
Hmm, now that's interesting, as is the reasoning - that it was taboo and the impact of it never tarnished. Do you think it also could've been that there was more to let down with Star Wars? Despite it being a sci-fi and Halloween being very much of the earth, the characters in Star Wars were more connectable - that is, that there was more room for disappointment there than there was for Halloween.
Depp is a bad actor and his Grindelwald kill it. Even Mikkelsen couldn't salvage the franchise. It should have been a standalone and about the creatures. Just like Rogue is one of the best Star Wars movie being a stand alone. The two wannabe Jedis were even the worst part, just like Grindelwald. Better short but impressive scenes like the ones with Vader in Rogue one, than a center character who drags everything down like in the second Beast film. Depp's "freakish" approach worked well with Sparrows, but extremely bad with Grindelwald. The other two actors played Grindelwald way better.
I think this would’ve been a good way to go about it. Instead of trying to make a series, they should’ve just done “Fantastic Beasts: A Wizarding World Story”. Just a bunch of tangentially connected movies with a through line, but otherwise separate.
Of course, you cna't forget The Mummy (2017), which killed the Dark Universe before it even started!
That is a shame, too, because I actually liked The Mummy. In fact, I have it on 4K Blu-Ray. It's crazy that the film made over $400 million worldwide and was still regarded as a failure. It's not nearly as good as the 1999 adaptation, but I enjoyed it and really would've liked to have seen the Dark Universe idea continue.
Yup. The only reason I didn't put it in this video is because I think I covered it in detail fairly recently. That was a disappointing one.
@@sorenpx The issue was the marketing + the cost overruns. The director, Alex Kurtzman, basically admitted he didn't know what he was doing, so things took longer - and every extra day can add six or seven figures.
The last Knight felt so much like a afterthought. Like they knew the franchise was bad and want to end it the fast as possible.
Yup. They thought it'd just print money. They were right for a long time, but eventually, they oversaturated it so much the printer just jammed.
Bay wanted it all to end, but the studio didn't. Currently, the studio doesn't, but the money is now confetti! It's no longer there. It's sad, but they're worse things that can happen.
We fooled ourselves into being okay with Force Awakens, but half of us utterly hated Last Jedi and the other half hated Rise of Skywalker. Stay away from the words Rise and Last, lol.
I still want to try to remain optimistic for the future lol. Though how long it's gonna be is anyones guess. I don't think I've seen such expensive movies get delayed so much before.
I still think The Force Awakens is good but the last two movies utter fucked it over.
I didn’t like Force Awakens when it came out. While I was watching it in the theatres, I realized it was A New Hope and I could predict most of what came next.
I liked the force awakens until the rose tinted glasses came off and I realized it was just a new hope but worse. Didn't watch tlj in theaters and I have not and will not ever watch the rise of Skywalker.
There are parts of The Last Jedi that I think are fine, but are surrounded by other parts that REALLY don’t work (obviously).
What it needed was a whole sequence of the film covering the relationship between Luke and Ben-think the long flashback sequence in Crouching Tiger that reveals a whole other story happening beneath the main story which also enriches it. We needed to see Luke and Ben grow their relationship, then the falling the apart, so we’d care about it. I don’t even dislike Luke being jaded at the start of TLJ, because we could have seen his struggling faith in being “the last jedi” trying to bring them back from the dead, and Ben being the one, but having psychological struggles with the burden of “being the one”, with his knowledge of how wrong it can go (Vader being a known historical figure now) and questioning his own capability AND sacrificing his whole life to have to serve something he maybe doesn’t fully have faith in himself. Then it would make more sense for Luke to doubt Ben and himself, and Ben doubts himself and increasingly doubts the Jedi for their past failures, as well as the last of them positioning someone who doesn’t believe in himself to be its new champion, a disaster waiting to happen which he sees but Luke is blinded to because he can’t accept Ben would fall the way Vader did. The pressure Luke feels that leads him to deny the ticking time bomb would be the fact that he is the last one (he is aware of), meaning if he fails that’s it-failure isn’t an option, and he unintentionally ends up in a situation where his reasons for bringing the Jedi back just to bring them back, rather than solely to serve as paragons of “balance” and all that. Thus, we watch the relationship erode into some great dual betrayal that never needed to happen but it due to the complex circumstances. This would have complicated Luke’s reluctance with Rey in interesting ways that allow for each of these key characters to progress toward narrative revelations more naturally and in a way we’d actually care about.
I actually had no idea the last transformers movie even existed.
That's why the box office collapsed lol. It's actually odd - for a movie that's part of such a big franchise, and had such a high budget, it kind of flew under the radar - mostly because I think people had gotten tired of the franchise. Bad movie + exhaustion = iced.
, a ez,,,y,8,y,y9,yy,8,,8,8,yyzyzyxyzs@@Syntopikon
I don’t think we got clear prof that aquamen 2 actually was ever released.
MIB International was like a fever dream lol
A bad dream
The Star Wars prequels made the Star Wars even more popular than ever before. I thought that hating the Prequels (which I never ever hated) was beyond outdated.
I think it's always worth considering whether or not the hate is real or just vocal. It might just be the people I know or quarters I go to, but Star Wars just has a much more intense fanbase than others. Maybe it also exists for Lord of the Rings, which is the series I enjoy the most, but if it does, I've not noticed it.
Only thing outdated is the CGI in the prequels. The prequels are all horrible. The last of the three just a bit less then the first two. Badly written, poorly directed and full of horrible acting (mostly due to to bad writing and poor directing).
I would rather watch any of the sequels 5 times than watch any of prequels once.
This was during the transition from film to digital and Lucas was a lot more experimental with them with regards to the tech involved, so I think makes sense that the CG I is pretty rough compared to now. We're at nigh-photorealism levels at this point.
@@tumppuman OT fanboys are so predictable.
“Badly written”? That’s the universal code for “I have no idea what I’m talking about, but I’m gonna talk anyway.” The Prequels are objectively the best-written Star Wars movies.
But let’s address the elephant in the room: hating something for 40 years and still showing up to announce your hatred like it’s breaking news? The fact that it angers you that people like something that you hate.
That is a psychotic-level of obsession; one that all OT fanboys seem to share.
Wait... Merlin and King Arthur were part of the last Transformers movie?! That's insane.
Yup. The writers really went off the deep end with these movies lol
Rotten Tomatoes is full of bs ratings. There's really no point in comparing ratings on it. I prefer IMDb, however since Rings of power debacle, even IMDb has been unreliable, at least for modern media. For old movies and tv, it still is quite alright.
I think it depends on what you use them for. I always use Rotten Tomatoes as a consensus barometer - that is 75% for me doesn't mean 7.5/10, but rather 3/4 people said the movie is a fine watch, which is pretty solid.
iMDB I never really got into after I found out Shawshank was number 1 on the top 250 list. It's a fine movie, to be sure, but not deserving of top 10 or top 50 or even top 100 let alone first place.
Letterboxd, which I use for my own tracking, is fine enough. Most movies seem to trend towards 2-3/5, which is where most should be. There are very few 5/5s or 1/5s.
@@Syntopikon Rotten Tomatoes is filled with paid reviews that it even became a story. But you don't mind because you prefer the narrative they give you. You don't care.
@@henrytownsend4869 I've no doubt there're paid reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, but why would I waste any time figuring out what percentage of reviews are paid for?
Here's a perspective on IMDb ratings. Higher ratings don't mean a movie is better, it just means that the majority of people who watched and voted it liked it very much, on a scale of 1-10. Like the Shawshank Redemption might not be the best movie but it's nearly universally liked very much by those who watched it. In this sense, IMDb seems to represent users preferences more finely than RT, because RT doesn't care about the scale rating of a movie, but takes account of just a positive or negative reception of it and calculates percentage of positives. But that's the problem with IMDb too especially for modern movies which can be easily review bombed or easily overrated, just like on RT.
Perhaps killing off John Conner in the first 10 minutes of your film Tim and James is why it failed. Not to mention so they stopped Skynet at the end of T2. But it just so happens another AI called Legion who is basically the same thing and looks exactly the same happens to take over. And the film pretty much copies the exact same beats of the first two films. Not to mention what they did to Sarah Conner and Arnolds Terminator. How in the hell did neither of them. But especially James not understand that this movie was an absolute spit in the face to fans of the franchise. Man these people are out of touch.
It's kind of telling that of them, Cameron is the only one that's willing to come back at this point lol
Maybe, if he's in the directors chair, it might turn out different?
@@Syntopikon I mean I don't know what he would have done differently to Dark Fate. Two he's busy making 5 more Avatar films. Which those films do nothing for me. Despite loving his other classics. Not to mention his age, 70. At this point it's time to let it die.
I think he intends to go the Ridley Scott + Clint Eastwood way of directing into his 90s lol
I believe he's also developing an adaptation of a book, Ghosts of Hiroshima. I think that's after Avatar 3. I do enjoy the Avatar films, especially from the tech side of things. Epic movies - or movies of scale - do a particular wonder for me on the big screen. I can understand how others don't like them, though. Of my friends and family, I think I might be the only fan lol
I never questioned the Bayverse Transformers. The DCEU is a fine series but didn't needed to be rushed.
I think the issue with the DCEU ended up being Avengers. They saw how that pulled $1.5 billion and decided that they needed to skip the years of ground work and just throw the Justice League together. I think if they took on a 5 year plan, 1-2 movies a year, they could've built up to something wonderful.
Great video as always, there's so much to talk about with each of these franchises. But yeah as you said it is all about maintaining and taking care of it liek a plant or it'll wither away.
For me the Terminator series is the one that hurts the most as I kept hoping for something good especially with Salvation and Dark Fate. Salvation was a great idea and had some great moments, but the story and visual style needed to be handled by a more distinctive director. And Dark Fate I enjoyed more than Genisys (which put me to sleep), but unfortunately it was another case not having great execution and coming after the previous entries.
Glad you liked it! Yup, maintaining it is the most difficult thing. You don't want to give it to much sunlight or water or too little. The issue is figuring out the right amount.
Terminator might have another life if Cameron is able to do it the way he wants, though it's up in the air. Still, I like to remain hopeful.
Christmas is coming around, and another franchise that was ruined was Home Alone. A lot of people don't like Home Alone 3 (but personally, I did like it) because of no connection to the McCalister's and, of course, no Kevin or Harry & Marv. Macaulay Culkin didn't want to do Home Alone 3 due to being too old for the role of Kevin McCalister and he had other projects in his sleeve from The Good Son to Richie Rich. Then, after that there was two tv Home Alone movies (which are 4 and 5) but lastly in 2021 Home Sweet Home Alone was a reboot but had little connections to the McCalister's with Buzz being a cop and mentioning Kevin from years ago of being "Home Alone". Which Home Sweet Home Alone didn't make any sense at all to be made. So after Home Alone 2 for many people, the franchise was ruined.
I did not even like Home Alone 2, though it certainly is much, much better than any of the sequels that followed it. So for me, there never has been a Home Alone franchise. There's just the first film. (That said, I don't think I've seen Home Alone 2 since it was first released. Maybe I should give it another chance.)
Yup, the Home Alone series would most certainly qualify here. I recall that I saw parts of 3, but I don't think I ever finished it. Home Alone 2, while not a perfect film, is a near enough perfect holiday film, so it's got a special place in my heart.
@@sorenpx I think you should. Home Alone 2 still has a lot of heart in it. While it is pretty much the first film, the fish out of water - Kevin in New York - element is a good change.
@@Syntopikon I guess I'll have to do it then. I've been looking for stuff to watch this Christmas that I haven't seen a thousand times anyway. While I did enjoy some of the new theatrical Christmas films (The Best Christmas Pageant Ever and Red One were both enjoyable for me), all of the new streaming efforts look like total garbage.
I preferred Genesis over Dark Fate . While it wasn’t perfect, it still wrapped up the story decently, while I felt Dark Fate copied all the others and brought nothing new.
Therein lies the biggest and most obvious issue when it comes to franchises: when should one stop and let the franchise take a breath? I'm not one of those people that think one shouldn't make sequels, or even a bunch. Zatoichi proves that not only can you make a bunch of movies in a series, but a bunch of good ones. But with how expensive and oxygen-hogging American productions are, a long gestation period would be helpful. Then, when continuing, while it might be helpful to have the original creator on board in some capacity, fresh, new voices should take the lead.
both are horrible
In one, John Connor is evil, and in the other, he is killed.
@@scrystine If they had managed to make a sequel to Genisys where the whole point was that the parents of John Connor try to make sure he doesn't end up the way he did in Genisys, and then maybe that they can't stop the war from happening and there was a third movie where we finally see that war properly, and in the end John Connor gets control of the time machine early enough that he can reset the whole past of his time line to what happened in the first ever movie, I think it might have worked. But I agree that Genisys was not well done - at the very least they should have shown John Connor at least trying to fight what had taken him over, and his future parents maybe concentrating more on trying to save him after they found out, earlier than they did in that movie, even if they maybe fail in the end - and the actors for Sarah Connor and especially Kyle Reese were miscast.
Have to say that the one thing I have been most disappointed with that franchise is that we never got to properly see John Connor as the adult badass leader, and as the main character in his own movie. The only one that tried that is Salvation, and even in that he is more of a supporting character, and is not the leader he was supposed to be yet. I just can't figure out why they went that way, the logical direction would have been a proper war film just showing how Connor either is already the leader, or how he first gets to that position and then devises a plan that gets humans the victory.
That doesn't make any sense. Genisys copied all the others even more. In fact, the schtick was to combine all the cool things from previous movies.
Is very annoying because all these reboots, sequels and spinoffs are so bad and/or unnecessary, that it takes the magic away from the original movie and waters down the quality of the story. Let golden movies die in piece for eternal glory, not milk them incessantly and turn into dumb zombies. Legacy > Milking.
The allure of a billion dollars is hard to resist, though. Sequels - even after a long time - can be done well. I thought Top Gun: Maverick was a great movie and one of my favorites of the 2020s so far. But it gestated for a long time - it was in development longer than all of the sequels combined.
But it didn't try to do spectacular things - though the aerial sequences were spectacular. It tackled relevant ideas: aging, grief, mentorship, competition. The "bad guys", inasmuch as they exist, were sideshows to the characters, who took center stage. To top it off, it was excellently made and deserving of its many rewatches. It's a sequel that, I think, outstripped its predecessor.
@Syntopikon have to agree on this one 👌🏼 absolutely. Top Gun Maverick is a great sequel. But it is different from milking an IP. 1 sequel is fine, whether it is good or bad, worth the try if the plot of the movie allows a logical continuation and builds over (not copy) the first one. A trilogy is only good if the second movie was good. Beyond that your name is MI: Tom Cruise (good), or Fast and Furious (not good). Sometimes I believe intention is key, Top Gun Maverick wasn't created to catapult a franchise, as Tron Legacy was to, and the latter just could not, despite long development. Loved the movie, but lacked something.
This likely will be an unpopular opinion, but the greatest Star Wars movie of all time is in fact one of the prequels: Revenge of the Sith. If all the prequels had been as good as that entry, the prequels undoubtedly would've been much better received, but at least the trilogy goes out on a high note.
As for the DCEU, I would really like to know what the result would've been if the franchise had never been handed over to Zack Snyder. The tone that he set with Man of Steel was just not right. Too dark, too gloomy, too cynical. Personally, I did like Aquaman and Wonder Woman, which were among the more upbeat, fun entries in the franchise, though I do have to say that I think Batman v Superman is a better film than it's usually given credit for.
One thing you notice on Rotten Tomatoes is that each of the prequels actually seemed to get better reviews than the prior one, so you might be right with RotS.
Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Shazam, and Blue Beetle were, I think, the highlights and are the tone that most of the movies should have had. But I agree about the dark, gloomy, and cynical tone for Man of Steel. That's just not Superman - it's truth, justice, and the American Way, with plenty of hope thrown it. Snyder's style across all of his films is just much darker and while it works for something like Watchmen or 300, this just isn't the place for it. It's the one thing I'd like to see James Gunn get right.
@@Syntopikon I still haven't seen Blue Beetle. I may have to check it out. I think I'm kind of over superhero movies for a while though, especially with some of the poor decisions that both Marvel and DC have made in the last few years.
And I do hope you're right about Gunn and that he's able to successfully bring Superman back to his roots and also come up with a story that is fitting.
Blue Beetle was more fun, and had more heart, than most of the other superhero movies. It's still very DC-like, but its one of their best, and one that deserved a better release than it got.
The Star Wars prequels were my first experience of Star Wars, so i loved them at the time. Still enjoy Episode 3 now. They still felt like Star Wars. I think Disney era just didn't feel like it to me.
Also i forgot there was a 4th Men in Black movie. The third one was pretty decent. But the franchise is nothing without Will Smith in it, so not surprised the latest one flopped.
I was a huge fan of the Fox Xmen movies. Its sad how disappointing it ended with Dark Phoenix. I kinda wish they just stopped at 'Days of Future Past', which was perfect.
Happy to hear that you enjoyed them. I think peoples gateway to Star Wars usually ends up being their favorite. It's why, as much as I do enjoy the movies, Knights of the Old Republican is still my favorite Star Wars thing made so far.
Yeah, Will Smith - and Tommy Lee Jones, it must be said - have some of the best on screen chemistry I've ever seen. Jones as the straight man, Smith as the hotshot - it works wildly well.
Dark Phoenix ended up being the only X-Men movie I didn't see in theaters (from the time I started going to the movies). Apocalypse was that disappointing for. Days of Future Past would've been an excellent stopping point, after which they could've rebooted.
MMW James Gunn is going to mess up DC just as bad as Zack Snyder. I hated, hated, hated GotG 3. So much animal torture. James Gunn with total power is gonna be unwatchable by most audiences.
Did this dude just say that some scene in a transformers sequel was one of the best things ever put on film? Jesus Christ man, I’ve never stopped a video so fast. Leapt outta my chair like I was riding … Grimlock? WTF…
Optimus riding Grimlock is pure cinema. It's one of those things that needs no dialogue, no narrative, maybe not even any music. It's absolutely kinetic and conveys all it needs to in the action. A lot of Bay's work is like that, at least for me.
I will never forget the moment I realized the phantom menace was going to be horrible.
The text crawl. "...A trade embargo over a dispute about taxation to outlying star systems..." Since when is a children's movie suddenly C - Span... Iiiiiiinnnnn SssssppppAaaaaaaaace!!!!
How Lucas deflects criticism for the star wars prequels' is hilariously shallow because of all the space politic talks that will fly over any kid's head. Also he's implying kids movies can't have great acting, characters and writing. Third time was the charm imo as episode 3 finally felt like the best of star wars to me, aka episodes 4 and 5
I'm reading through The Star Wars Archives Episodes 1-3, by Paul Duncan. Lucas was writing the script in the wake of the Republican Revolution in the late mid-90s, which apparently stuck with him (Nute Gunray's name's inspired by Newt Gingrich and Ronald Reagan - he had also sued the Reagan Administration over using the "Star Wars" name for the missile defense system that was talked about).
You are giving too much credit to the adults. Many times they do child level mistakes and assestments. Prequels were deeper than they seemed
21st Century audiences should thank the Hollywood studios of 80-90 years ago. If they operated like the creatively barren Hollywood of today, we'd be awaiting the release of Boy's Town 87, G-Men 91, and The 103rd Night At The Opera.
WHEW... Good thing we have DC Studios now.
19:39 I WANT THOSE WORDS ON REPEAT.
Lol pretty much. I don't think they have to worry about Gunn pulling a Todd Phillips with the budget, so they should definitely give him more leeway.
I think revenge of the sith was actually amazing. Tpm and aotc were meh but the sequel trilogy makes even them look like masterpieces.
Which makes me wonder how the sequel trilogy will be thought of once whatever ends up being next comes out lol
@Syntopikon Star wars has hit complete rock bottom for me so I literally don't think it can get any worse imo lol.
Viewed a certain way, I guess that's a positive lol
it felt like the people behind the The Last Knight were so done with the series and the message was clear wth the box-office that the audience were getting sick of that style.
It was a new team that hadn't worked on the movies before. They should've gotten the same screenwriter/story guy they had on Dark and Age. The movies weren't great, but they both clocked more than a billion. Also, they shouldn't have had the Knights of the Round Table angle. It was way out of place.
😂 you literally proved the reason why i stay subscribed and love your uploads from 00:30 - 01:00 amazing keep up the amazing work i love your videos
Obviously a man of discerning taste. Not to mention focus, commitment, and sheer will, as your PFP indicates.
Also, how come you😢didn’t mention Webs intervention on every DC movie since BvS changing movies behind the backs of the directors multiple times
Transformers definitely died as a box office juggernaut in 2017. Tis a shame! They were one of the few dumb ut fun movies I loved watching! 🙁
It's kind of wild that Dark of the Moon & Age of Extinction made as much as they did. I still enjoy rewatching the older ones and I know for a fact that if they do another, I'm gonna be there opening weekend lol
I like the Star Wars prequels I prefer over the sequels but I’m not going to pretend that the prequels didn’t garner a lot of hate when they first came out because they did but I feel like they have gone better with the passage of time and are far more appreciated now then they were back then
I think that's what happens for a lot of movies. Times heals all wounds and movies that were castigated at the time get reappraised. The Night of the Hunter is a famous example: decried on release, now considered one of the best movies ever made.
Didn’t new mutants movie actually get released shortly after dark phoenix?
It did, but it had such an odd release and production. It seemed wildly mismanaged and was dropped in the middle of the pandemic.
@@Syntopikon I thought that might have been the case but I wasn’t sure.
Highlander 2: The Quickening (1991)
From my experience the only people who really hate the Star Wars Prequels are those who either grew up with the Original Trilogy, or those who had their opinions shaped by someone who grew up with the Original Trilogy.
As someone who was 9 years old when Episode 1 came out; I remember being on the playground and talking about it with my group of friends. I specifically remember this one friend of mine wouldn't stfu about how cool he thought seeing C3P0 without his metal plating blew his little 9 year old mind away. I saw each one in theaters with my friends; we bought tickets to Episode 3 three times. But we were the age group these movies were made for; you know, just like how the Original Trilogy was made for 12 year olds back in 1977.
The first time I ever heard about "Prequel Hate" was when I was in High School and it was from a new "geek" teacher fresh out of college and he wouldn't stfu about; which was annoying af.
Great analysis…thank youuuuuuuu
Glad you liked it!
Sequel trilogy had so much potential 😞
Few things more painful than seeing squandered potential 😮💨
By the time the Last Knight came out people had moved on from the transformers into the MCU and Star Wars. It was just a horrible movie even worse than Revenge of the Fallen. At least Bumblebee and Transformers One are good.
DC should just taken care by Paul Dini and Bruce Timm, this guys understand better than anybody else the characters and storytelling.
I blame the failure of fantastic beasts to the reboot show of Harry potter, if they had done better financially and critically it would never lead to that decision.
X-Men Dark Phoenix is alongside X-Men origins and new mutants the worst in the series, miserable. I can get through the mediocrity of the last stand and apocalypse but this three killed the franchise. Glad it got the send off with Deadpool 3!
It's a bit wild just how much Transformers collapsed from 4 to 5 - pretty much half the gross.
Dini & Timm would've been could choices. I'll forever be grateful to them for their animated work - JL, JLU, and Batman/Superman TAS are some of my favorites. Dino also made Tower Prep for Cartoon Network in 2010, which I enjoyed.
Coming from a casual audience who watched all Star Wars movies (not a huge fan though), TLJ was my favorite
I can dig it. Is there something about TLJ that stood out to you more than the other Star Wars movies?
@Syntopikon the way TLJ sets up some new ideas are intriguing to me at least, like how Rey's parents are nobody and the broom kid in the end implies that the force is something that everyone can have, i can understand if fans didn't like it though
Right on. Stan Lee used to say that "Every comic is someone's first." That applies here, too, I think - every movie, franchise or not, is either someone's first or favorite. I suppose that's also the hardest thing - making something that resonates with fans as well as not.
There was a blue beetle movie?
It was a blink and you missed it kinda deal.
Why keep changing the title of this video ?
The prequels are still just so horribly bad.
They came out around my informative years. I was so bored during all 3 of them, that my dad had to wake me up a few times because I kept falling asleep during RotS.
Even 2/3 decades later I find the prequels awful, and while I think the sequels overall are decent and better than the prequels (especially TLJ)
What should have been my OT experience came in 2001, when PJ released his magnum opus, his masterpiece.
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring.
Seeing LOTR in theaters is definitely one of my favorite moviegoing experiences.
@ it’s a tradition in my house to either watch them once a month or if they happen to be rereleased in theaters go at least thrice to all 3 movies.
One of my biggest flexes is going to 2 Jackson extended marathons (both Hobbit and Rings back to back) back to back, without falling asleep
How did The Hobbit movies stack up for you? There were changes that didn't make sense, though, on the whole, I had a good time watching all three. Nowhere near the LOTR trilogy, but enough that I got them on 4K and still rewatch them from time to time.
@ I thought they were okay, I lowered my expectations for those because they were based on The Hobbit, a children’s book that wasn’t exactly deeply rooted in lore
I feel like covering games as well as movies would be great to see if that is something you want to do of course
Definitely. I'm working on writing a video about video games that were in development hell for a long time, as well as one on the history of video game & movie adaptations (which I think I enjoy more than most, even if they end up doing terribly). Hoping to get at least one of those out next month!
@@Syntopikon awesome can't wait i like the sound of both of them
For sugestions
Video games that hated coz some controversies
Like Hogwarts legacy,atomic heart,dragon age veilguard,the day after
@rezaqalam482 vailgaurd is hated for good reason
JJ Abrams Star Trek movies...
Those are 3 interesting cases. None of them did spectacularly well financially (though I don't think they lost money), but all got decent enough reviews. Still, it's been 8 years since Beyond.
@@Syntopikon They are artistically and creatively bankrupt wastes of celluloid which destroys Gene Roddenberry's ideas.
Let's be honest most of these franchises, save perhaps, Indiana Jones would be jokes and flops, if they hadn't embedded themselves in our grey matter as children
I think that's usually how it goes, though. The things we like as children are also what we tend to like as adults. There's more time - and penchant - to explore realms of fantasy and sci-fi then, as opposed to later on.
For a franchise to go bad, it has to have been good at some point (looking at you Transformers).
Them be fighting words. The Transformers movies have some sick scenes 😤
Please look up what 'begs the question' means.
I'm pretty sure the Disney Star Wars production line are basically just trolling fans of the original Lucas tirlogy: the palpable contempt for the source material and low opinion of the audience practically oozes off the screen.
It’s one of the big issues when it comes to revamping a franchise. In trying to please fans and newcomers, they ended up pleasing few. They should’ve gone all in or gone for a clean break.
The prequels were so hated that Lucas just gave up. He could’ve kept even just an advisory role on the sequels, but he decided “nah, let Disney and Kathleen take all the hate I used to get.” And it’s worked well, because now the fans all want him back, even though it seems highly unlikely. He can just relax on his ranch with his 4 billion dollars and watch the franchise he created continue its cycle of commercial success (for the most part) yet constant receptive disaster.
I, unironically and fervently, would like him to make one more Star Wars movie. Like I mentioned in the video, others feel far more strongly about the prequels and sequels than I do and while I like some more than others, I don't feel like I wasted money on any of them.
But Lucas went like 22 years between directing Star Wars and Phantom Menace, and we're up on 20 years between Revenge of the Sith and now. If Disney really wants to give the franchise a shot in the arm, I think Lucas could do it (irrespective of what the final movie turns out like - mostly just a last hurrah).
@ I just want him to do one last movie in general. But his heart hasn’t truly been in directing since 1977. After all, he only ever directed the prequel trilogy because everyone he asked, from Ron Howard to Spielberg, went “no George, only you can do this one”
Yup. Directing one Star Wars movie was enough to burn him out on directing for 20+ years lol. He's mentioned that directing (or writing) was never really his jam, and something he did because he had stories he wanted to tell but either not enough money for other directors, or no takers for the job.
I wonder if he didnt like writing or directing what else that leaves in regards to films? What did he like and want to do instead of those 2 jobs?
@@joshfacio9379 clearly producing/executive producing since that ends up making up most of his filmography
we differ so much on the transformers garbage i just stopped watching right there.
Differing opinions make the world go round.
Gunnverse is dead on arrival.
Don’t put that out in the universe 😭
First like first comment
Lucas saying that "Star wars is a kids movie, has always been a kids movie" is correct. The problem is that its fans are adults. Adults in the modern sense, meaning of emotionally children with larger bodies, not an adult,let's say, in the sense of world war II veteran. Most adults in the western world are essentially children. This has been the case for several decades now. It makes it very hard to Target a demographic for a film that was unveiled in the seventies and is still trying to make money now
Interestingly, though, Disney moved something like a billion dollars worth of merchandise within a few days in 2015 as it got closer to Force Awakens release. I think the franchise has popularity, but they're having a lot of difficulty connecting with the people.
Now, the Carter years were quite fraught and Lucas specifically wanted something that was optimistic, that people look up to and really relish. So I'm wondering if a return to form is what would be necessary for todays world.
I was 9 back in '77 when Star Wars as it was then called came out, and wow did it enthrall us. Since then I have seen the prequels they were passable at best and the sequels which in my opinion are garbage!! I did enjoy Rouge one though, Solo not as much. So while I don't agree with "most adults" in the western world being kids I do agree with Star Wars as a kids franchise. So as an adult I don't love this franchise anymore. As for the TV shows they are all a pile of Disney RUBBISH.
@@TheTonyahawk Do you think the differentiation is that when you enjoy something as a kid, there's something that's more, for lack of a better word, magical about it. I know that, for me, I read Lord of the Rings very young, and saw the movies when I was quite young as well. I've never seen anything that could live up to them, and I know that they're masterpieces of storytelling. But I'm curious whether or not I would feel that same way if I saw them when I was in my teens or twenties?
@@Syntopikon Absolutely!! When a property such as Star Wars or LOTR has such an impact on you as a child you tend too look back at it with nostalgic eyes. I read LOTR in the 3rd grade and loved the books I found Peter Jackson's films to be satisfying for me. The Star Wars sequels while not tarnishing the OGs for me now as an adult were a huge disappointment in the way they treated the characters, especially Luke. I saw Halloween in Nov '78 and was as enthralled with it as Star Wars, but the main difference is I still liked the newer films for better or worse, I guess that as adults our ideas change. Ultimately watching Stars Wars at 8 (I turned 9 in August) was expected at that age watching Halloween at 10 in 1978 was taboo and the impact of it has never tarnished.
Hmm, now that's interesting, as is the reasoning - that it was taboo and the impact of it never tarnished. Do you think it also could've been that there was more to let down with Star Wars? Despite it being a sci-fi and Halloween being very much of the earth, the characters in Star Wars were more connectable - that is, that there was more room for disappointment there than there was for Halloween.
Depp is a bad actor and his Grindelwald kill it. Even Mikkelsen couldn't salvage the franchise.
It should have been a standalone and about the creatures. Just like Rogue is one of the best Star Wars movie being a stand alone. The two wannabe Jedis were even the worst part, just like Grindelwald.
Better short but impressive scenes like the ones with Vader in Rogue one, than a center character who drags everything down like in the second Beast film.
Depp's "freakish" approach worked well with Sparrows, but extremely bad with Grindelwald. The other two actors played Grindelwald way better.
I think this would’ve been a good way to go about it. Instead of trying to make a series, they should’ve just done “Fantastic Beasts: A Wizarding World Story”. Just a bunch of tangentially connected movies with a through line, but otherwise separate.
Michael Bay ruined an industry. I hate him.
I think he more or less saw how things were going and rode the wave. The guy is a technically brilliant, visually astute filmmaker.
Kathleen Kennedy's Lucasfilm actively goes against the fans