This summer was surely the summer of sequels, three-quels and in some cases quad-quels. I don't have any particular objection to sequels, especially in the action/adventure category, because you set good heroes on new adventures. As long as the story doesn't spin its wheels then it can still be fun. Look at the James Bond series. Last year's CASINO ROYALE is one of the best Bond films ever made.
However, this summer we got a lot of passable to poor sequels. Just peruse this list SPIDER-MAN 3, 28 WEEKS LATER, SHREK THE THIRD, PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END, HOSTEL PART II, OCEAN'S THIRTEEN, FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER, EVAN ALMIGHTY, LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX, THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, DADDY DAY CAMP and RUSH HOUR 3. One could also add remakes like THE INVASION (INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS) and HALLOWEEN to this déjà vu cinema experience as well. Is this a sign of the lack of new ideas in Hollywood or the lack of nerve to film new ideas in Hollywood?
Whatever the case may be most of these movies received hit or miss reviews at best. LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX and THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM seem to have escaped the most unharmed. POTTER 5 received the best reviews from those who enjoy the maturing of the material and/or have read the books. Otherwise, it was slim pickens this summer. I haven't seen all the films listed above, and in some cases I never saw the original. (You can't make me watch DADDY DAY CARE.) So for This Weekend's Film Festival, I've decided to go back and look at what made some of these franchises so good to start off with.
The original SPIDER-MAN movie was truly the signal of all the superhero films to come after. Superhero origin stories can often be clunky as they plod through clichés, but director Sam Raimi did a good job of capturing the unique origin of Spider-Man. As I said in my original review, "[Toby] Maguire is the perfect choice as Spider-Man/ Peter Parker. He gives Spider-Man the awkwardness and bitterness that I remember from the comics." Spider-Man was a teenager who had to grapple with all the teenager problems along with the added responsibility of being a superhero. The first film sets this scenario up very well. Now the title of This Weekend's Film Festival doesn't apply to all sequels to these franchises, because in fact SPIDER-MAN 2 is the best superhero film ever made. This is the case because it had a solid base to build from, keeping all the elements that worked and fixed the parts that didn't. Even though I enjoyed SPIDER-MAN 3, it was bloated and silly, which were qualities that the original was not. This franchise didn't learn from the mistakes of X-MEN: THE LAST STAND or BATMAN & ROBIN — new characters can add spice but you can't lose track of the good ones you already have.
The Saturday matinee is for the whole family. With SHREK THE THIRD arriving on DVD this week, it's fitting to put SHREK in the lineup. If the trend continues, I gave SHREK four stars, SHREK 2 three and a half and SHREK THE THIRD three then the fourth installment will not be recommended. One thing this franchise gets right is that it moves the characters forward in a logical direction. It doesn't repeat the same plot as the previous installments. However, as I said in my SHREK THE THIRD review, "[the film] doesn’t walk the edge like the other films, but there are still enough flares of that same good ol’ SHREK that you remember why you were friends in the first place." What made the original so special was its "satirical look at fairy tales and the inadvertent, less than positive images they portrayed." For that reason, as I said in my original review, the "film will hold up well over the years." With each installment, the franchise has slowly lost its universal appeal in satirizing fairy tales and our use of them and turned into a kaleidoscope of pop culture references and sitcom scenarios. SHREK had an edge that's missing in the subsequent films. I don't slight the filmmakers for making Shrek grow up a bit, but when you replace pitch-black satire with fart jokes, you show you're desperate for new ideas.
In my original review for PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: THE CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL, I said, "Outside of the HARRY POTTER films, this could be the best new franchise that has come along since TERMINATOR in 1984." Oh what potential was wasted. I didn't outright recommend either of the PIRATES sequels. The blotted special effects fests lost all the charm of the original. The sequels had a chance to develop the central love story between Orlando Bloom's Will and Keira Knightly's Elizabeth, but fumbled it along the way. Johnny Depp's amazing Capt. Jack Sparrow was rendered sillier and sillier, instead of the crafty pirate he was in the original. Part 2 and 3 also drown in plot. Character development is rushed and crammed in just to make way for new characters and the next ridiculous action sequence. One good thing DEAD MAN'S CHEST did was to add a great new villain, then AT WORLD'S END comes along and marginalizes him for lesser bad guys. The second film was all setup and the final film only weakly paid it off. You feel that the first film was made with the joy in making a fun adventure, but the sequels feel like they were forced out under the pressure of blundering the box office and upping the action ante. In a rush to get two sequels into theaters, they lost the magic of CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL.
The Sunday lineup features films whose recent sequels I did not see, but I doubt were better than the original. OCEAN'S ELEVEN wasn't great, but it was cool fun. The all-star cast handled the witty dialogue and quirky characters with flare. George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt, Andy Garcia, Matt Damon, Don Cheadle, Bernie Mac and Carl Reiner are just a few of the star in the cast. The first sequel with its globetrotting plot wasn't as tight as the original, but it was just as fun. The first sequel (and from some reviews I read the second as well) suffered from the traditional curse of the sequel; they feel like a rehash of the original with overblown action just to up the wattage. Though the sequels may be fun, they don't have the freshness as OCEAN'S ELEVEN. Additionally, the heist genre isn't conducive to new adventures. What makes a new heist movie interesting is the personalities of the characters, so sequels rob the film of new personality dynamics. You could say that it might be more interesting if Danny Ocean worked with a new crew each time, but then you'd lose the star power that makes the movies fun. As I said in my original review, "this is light entertainment compared to [Steven] Soderbergh’s other work, but he must be commended for pulling off such an intricate tale so effortlessly." With OCEAN'S THIRTEEN hitting DVD this week, I'm eager to see if the third film can recapture some of the coolness of the original with the location switching back to Las Vegas.
Now I love the original DIE HARD and I think that DIE HARD II is one of the better sequels of all time. So when people say that LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, where the trailer shows John McClane knocking down a helicopter with a car and jumping off the wing of a jet, is better than the original, I become skeptical. I might be able to buy the best sequel, but I even doubt that. Why? Because part of what makes the first and second films so good is the tight setting. The third film lost the claustrophobic feeling that added so much tension to the original. Now the series has always had big action, but the stuff in the LIVE FREE trailer just looked plain ridiculous. Maybe if the whole thing was way over the top, but this isn't fantasy action. The first film had a great theme of people doing their jobs well and what that meant to them. The new film has some "oh so trendy" cyber plot. Now this is all being said having not seen the fourth installment. But as I said in my review of the original DIE HARD, "It’s a deceptive film, because the intelligent details can be easily lost in the rush of the rollercoaster ride. This film is more than just about cool dialogue and great action…" So next week when you rent, LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, you'll have seen where it all began this week, and have something to compare it to.
So thanks for indulging in my lesson on how to make a good sequel. This is a really entertaining lineup of films, which should be rewatched before seeing the recent sequels. SPIDER-MAN 3 is already out, SHREK THE THIRD and OCEAN'S THIRTEEN came out this week, LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD comes out Tuesday, Nov. 20th and AT WORLD'S END arrives Dec. 4th. So before those flicks, let's watch and then talk about the originals, so head to video store, update the rental queue or visit Zap2It.com for TV listings.
Rick DeMott
Animation World Network
Creator of Rick's Flicks Picks
