The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **Wisdom000** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:01 am

Meh, I loved the movie...

I don't get the hate for it at all... the people who do claim to hate it always douns like hispter douches to me... the only change to the movie I didn't like was the use of hallelujah during the fucking in the cockpit scene...

by **e_galston** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:06 am

BlueStreak wrote:Twigglet's right.

All of the great literary classics don't have sequels. The Three Musketeers, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, The Wizard of Oz are all examples of this. I'm glad that the publishers never sunk so low as to try to exploit these books for additional titles.

Furthermore, just think of how tarnished books such as The Chronicles of Narnia, Hamlet, Pride and Prejudice, The Lord of the Rings, Robinson Crusoe or The Aeneid would be had someone besides the author ever wrote a sequel to them. They'd probably be ruined forever.

i hope you are being sarcastic about the Wizard of Oz, since there were 14 Oz books written by Baum..

by **mrorangesoda** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:14 am

e_galston wrote:
i hope you are being sarcastic about the Wizard of Oz, since there were 14 Oz books written by Baum..

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:35 am

lol wrote:Even if you only appreciate it on a technical level, do you not think that it works so well as it's one of the only mainstream comics not tainted by a sequel.

I mean imagine the shit if JKRowling went back to Harry Potter. Or how people here regularly argue the prequels ruined Star Wars for them. Do we not want these companies to hold to some creative ideal?

I'll still argue that the Star Wars Saga SHOULD be made. It's too bad the Prequels were shit.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:41 am

lol wrote:
You're talking different fields completely. Watchmen is the one comic we can all say is technically amazing. A story which is known as better than anything else.

Look at Star Wars, Dark Knight Returns, The Phoenix Saga and Indiana Jones as franchises which have lost a lot of luster after their original stories were tampered with.

This was a book which purposely didn't set up for a sequel or prequel. All the prequel stuff is already there in the preview. This is a literacy travesty, and we're all accepting of it because a company wants to make money.

BTW - Hamlet and Pride and Prejudices sequels? You're reaching.

DO you ever tire of being wrong?

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade was a great movie. Again, that wasn't a franchise that was meant to end. When you look at Watchmen, what is there really to tell? The story ended, and quite well at that.

The Dark Knight Returns ended as well. It should never have been continued. In fact the whole point of the book is that he has outgrown Batman and learns to let it go. By going back and turning him into Batman again, well that's why the sequel fails.

There are properties that are tailor made for continuation, and there are those that should be left alone. Like Highlander...

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:44 am

mrorangesoda wrote:

by **Juan Cena** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:52 am

DMM wrote:IT WOULD BE LIKE DOING A PREQUEL TO THE BIBLE OR BIBLE: THE MOVIE

Too late. Somebody already did that.

by **Juan Cena** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:54 am

LobsterJ wrote:It's depressing, but we've come to the realisation that DC exists to make money.

Wow, what tipped you off that a giant corporation exists solely to make money?

My rants about Time-Warner :evil:

, hopefully.

by **e_galston** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:23 am

The Nacireman wrote:
My rants about Time-Warner , hopefully.

probably not.. its not like anyone REALLY pays attention to what you say..

by **Keb** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:25 am

If they want to make this shit, fine. I've done a pretty good job ignoring DC for the last couple years anyway.

I think the original is a masterpiece and it stands as my favourite superhero story ever, but whatever. Making a sequel or prequel shouldn't change that.

by **mrorangesoda** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:46 am

Keb wrote:I think the original is a masterpiece and it stands as my favourite superhero story ever, but whatever. Making a sequel or prequel shouldn't change that.

I think the secret fear of the people adamantly against this is that it will change it because the original isn't great enough to survive outside of its protected bubble of appreciation.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:51 am

Keb wrote:If they want to make this shit, fine. I've done a pretty good job ignoring DC for the last couple years anyway.

I think the original is a masterpiece and it stands as my favourite superhero story ever, but whatever. Making a sequel or prequel shouldn't change that.

That's what I would have thought, and I hope it doesn't.

But the Prequels do affect how I see the original trilogy now. I can't help but be annoyed that Boba Fett is now that stupid kid and that his father was perhaps the most inept assassin in the galaxy. I can't help but see "Annie" whenever I see Vader and how freaking whiny he was.

Yoda and the Emperor used to stand apart for me. I figured Yoda would never use a lightsaber, because he was just that in tune with the Force. I figured the Emperor was so fucking evil that he never would have need of a "Jedi" weapon, in his words.

So while I can sometimes divorce myself from it and look at the originals as a separate entity, the Prequels have an effect.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:54 am

mrorangesoda wrote:
I think the secret fear of the people adamantly against this is that it will change it because the original isn't great enough to survive outside of its protected bubble of appreciation.

Honestly, I don't get your line of reasoning here at all.

The original wasn't great so a prequel/sequel/side story done by a completely different creative team decades later will expose that? How exactly does that work?

That's like saying Shakespeare stories aren't good because you saw the Leonardo DiCaprio movie...

by **Greg** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:20 am

Yeah, I don't think there should be a sequel or prequel or spin off for something like Watchmen. If they do in fact make it, I wouldn't rush to read it but wouldn't fault people for being interested. But I do see why people would be adverse to it in general. It's sorta like my disdain for horror film franchises/sequels. I feel a lot of horror film franchises would have been stronger and even scarier if the first films were left alone and never spawned sequels. I feel sequels tend to water and weaken the original concepts.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:51 am

Greg wrote:Yeah, I don't think there should be a sequel or prequel or spin off for something like Watchmen. If they do in fact make it, I wouldn't rush to read it but wouldn't fault people for being interested. But I do see why people would be adverse to it in general. It's sorta like my disdain for horror film franchises/sequels. I feel a lot of horror film franchises would have been stronger and even scarier if the first films were left alone and never spawned sequels. I feel sequels tend to water and weaken the original concepts.

Nightmare on Elm Street was fucking brilliant. And it scared the living shit out of me.