Terrible Movies to Come-2011

[Univaded_Fox]

Tired of all the remakes and sequels this summer?  You ain't seen nothing yet!  As we march assuredly towards the celluloid apocalypse, here are some of the unnecessary sequels, prequels and remakes guaranteed to assault the eyes and intelligences of audiences in the year to come. 

Big Mommas-Like Father, Like Son: Remember Big Momma's House and Big Momma's House 2?  No?  Martin Lawrence in drag and a fat suit?  Yeah, that one.  Well, he's coming back to breakdown new levels of taste. 

Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2-Rodrick Rules: The whining continues.

Footloose: However this turns out, the music will undoubtedly be six degrees separated from "catchy". 

Scream 4: Just when you thought this franchise was deader than Neve Campbell's career.

The Three Musketeers: For the four-hundredth time, enough already!

The Thing: Or "That Thing you redo every 30 years".

The Hangover 2: Because two hangovers are better than one!

Rise of the Apes: Yep, those damn dirty apes are finally going to take over this planet.  And guess where will be the setting their first conquest?  Vancouver.

Transformers 3: It has to be better than Transformers 2.

The Smurfs: Oh. Dear. Lord!

Spy Kids 4-Armageddon: Need I say more?

Final Destination 5: They promised us the last one was the last one.  They promised us!

Straw Dogs: How can you remake a classic piece of cinema?

Underworld 4: Again, they promised us...

Journey to the Mysterious Island: Brendan Fraser boldly goes wherever the 3-D budget takes him in this sequel to 2008's Journey to the Center of the Earth. 

Alvin and the Chipmunks-Chip Wrecked:  Perhaps Chipped Away would be more appropriate, anybody?

[Roffo]

Yay, more sequels! . . . mhm. .

I wonder if all these movies will be in 3D.

[drewdle]

What we need is to pay more attention to Sundance and other film festivals and fuck Hollywood altogether.

There's only one reason for the majority of the atrocities on this list: guaranteed money. Even if people don't want to see it, they will, because their curiosity will get the better of them, or for movies like Scream, people who are now moved on with a college degree, spouse, and offspring want to be taken back to their beer-drinking fratboy days. Cashing in on past success is a typical Hollywood ploy when writers and talent are running thin and production houses don't want to take risks. Let's go through the list.

Diary Of a Wimpy Kid: I saw the first one out of curiosity, and I though it was the modern day equivalent of Teen Witch. Nothing made sense, and it was all strung together by a thin, cheesy lesson that was fairly benign even for the over-five crowd. They're making a sequel so parents will have something else to shut their children up with.

Big Momma's: Curiosity and the past is all this has to offer, and yet, it will probably get people into the seats. A shame, really. Popcorn deserves better.

The Hangover 2: An attempt to cash in on the surprisingly popularity of the original. The concept was a pretty funny one, but I couldn't sit through the movie. It's like they developed one really interesting idea, like a fragile china doll, and proceeded to smash it with a mallet until you could snort the remains.

Scream 4: Modern nostalgia, pure and simple. Curiosity soon parts a fool from his money, and doesn't this franchise have a face to save after all those terrible Scary Movie ripoffs?

Rise Of The Apes: This COULD be interesting, but it depends. Does it follow on the original Planet Of The Apes, or the remake that had Mark Wahlburg in it? I wasn't a fan of the remake, so if it's more of that... This is the ONLY movie on this list with some semblance of an original plot idea. For that it scores points, but time will tell.

Transformers 3: How can you make a sequel to a movie that doesn't exist? Yes, I'm not ready to accept Transformers 2 is real. We make our own reality, so I can will it out of existence if I try hard enough. Still, I predict this will stall badly, especially now that we're bereft of Meagan Fox's assets.

The Smurfs: I really don't think we need to go here. The Smurfs barely had a story as a TV show. How do you make it a two hour movie? Oh right! You apply the Cat In The Hat treatment, because that worked so well.

Spy-Kids 4: Just more mindless fodder to shut up the offspring of the masses.

Underworld 4: Now here's a real dead-horse-beating championship. This series has NEVER been good, not since the first one. Don't get me wrong; it was fun and campy in a way not unlike what Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2, and Army Of Darkness had to offer. However, UNLIKE those fantastic movies, Underworld has never stopped taking itself so seriously. That's what made Army Of Darkness an absolute trip to watch, was that all serious business was set aside and they had some fun with it.

Alvin And The Chipmunks: Trying to do the Garfield franchise one better, they're coming back for another hit. I hate these movies. They're littered with product placement (seriously, try and find at least two scenes in sequence where you don't see a name brand product or image on screen, bet you can't do it), everything is perfectly presented (super green grass, super-saturated colors, it's like we're looking through a coke bottle at what happened to the world if the 50's and the American Dream had taken hold of everything), and the writing is SO unbelievably awful that the reason you think four people have writing credits is because they came up with it at a bar, drunk, at 3AM, pissing away the money you spent taking your spoiled brat to the last one.

So yeah, like I said, Sundance. The only great stuff coming out these days is from indie filmmakers. The rest of it isn't fit for Chinese mind torture. Though I'm sure the drooling mongoloids of the masses will enjoy all of this.

[Lune]

So what is new  ???  For every cruddy movie Hollywood puts out there is a good one.  In fact the ratio of good movies Hollywood puts to cruddy ones is improving because of the difficulties getting funding for films.  Lets face it, customers are smarter, better informed and expect more of their movies then ever before 'realism' was not a word you heard 15 years ago.

[drewdle]

So what is new  ???  For every cruddy movie Hollywood puts out there is a good one.  In fact the ratio of good movies Hollywood puts to cruddy ones is improving because of the difficulties getting funding for films.  Lets face it, customers are smarter, better informed and expect more of their movies then ever before 'realism' was not a word you heard 15 years ago.

While I agree that it's more difficult to get funding for films, honestly, can you still stand by the whole "customers are smarter, better informed, and expect more of their movies" when Alvin & The Chipmunks has done well enough to have not one, not two, but THREE theatrical releases? They used to shuffle that kind of crap quietly off to Direct-To-Home-Video dreamland.

Perhaps we're smarter, but the vast majority? I'm not hedging my bets. Maybe that's just because I'm a misanthropic wanker.

[Univaded_Fox]

To this pile you can add Arthur.  Yes, oh my god, they are remaking ARTHUR!  I haven't even seen the original, and they are remaking Arthur.  What's next?  Tootsie?  The Last Starfighter?  The Breakfast Club?  The eighties are up for grabs, folks; just like the 50s were in the 70s, and the 70s were in the 90s.  We have seen Rocky, Rambo, Die Hard, Jason, Freddy Kruger, Michael Myers and the Terminator all come back in recent years after extended leaves of absence.  Hell, even Wargames had a direct-to-DVD rip-off, and Fame got castrated by the hip hoppers.  Maybe we're in for another Gremlins, or even the Ghoulies, or ET: The Extraterrestrial Sequel.  If they are redoing Red Dawn, maybe it will be followed by The Day After.  If a revamped Hairspray can takeoff, maybe Zoot Suit will get the same treatment, or another version of Xanadu based on the Broadway musical.  You see, William Goldman was right: NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING!

Oh god, they are remaking Oh God!

[Kardrack]

So many sequels.  The thing about remakes is you do NOT remake movies that actually did well!  You do remakes of failed projects if you can do them right.  Movies I would like to see however would be movies based on the old Magic the Gathering novels.  The brothers' war, rath cycle, etc...  Oh and aren't they remaking The Hobbit?  Hell, I remember hearing about a Remake of Evil Dead without Bruce Cambell.  Smart movie going folks do not want sequals and remakes.  Take a chance and make NEW movies.  No franchise stuff either.  We get like one or two good original movies a year and it should be much more than that.

[Kell]

Well, other than hangover 2 and scream 4, I can't see myself even using bandwidth on any of those...

Scream 4 I am required to see, at some point, due to a love of the old cult horror movies... I haven't looked into who is directing it again, but hell, it can't be worse than scream 3... And since the not-so good Friday the 13th, the mediocre Halloween remake, the unwatchable halloween 2 remake, and the surprisingly not that bad nightmare on elmstreet remake (My love of Freddy was ALMOST done justice, and it had a few good lines)...  Well, I gotta sit threw scream 4 just to see if they did the old ones justice or not, and if not, likely for some good laughs.

Hangover 2 I'll end up seeing some day because I know too many people obsessed with the first one... don't plan to spend a penny on it however.

[Wyrd-Hotd]

One Word.  "Book" theres tones of em, and an exemplary amount of them with awesome plots/stories that could make excellent movies unless you some how botch them so bad that its so bloody, bruised and maimed that it does not even resemble the original idea *COUGH* Eragon *COUGH*

or take a few pages from the new Star Trek Movie, somehow, remake a series. alter it completely but still somehow manage to make it a great movie (yes it had flaws, BUT! think of all the non-Trek-Fans it brought in that liked it, and i liked it too, being a Trek fan!)

[Van_Fox]

$$$$ <--- thats what its all about.

[Univaded_Fox]

Three Musketeers is being remade in 3-D.  Another adaptation that rides the crest of a fad.  Remember The Musketeer in 2001, how they went overboard promoting they had a Chinese martial artist to direct the fight choreography?  I can see this film turning into one giant SCTV sketch:  "En garde!"  *Pokes at camera*

[Mené]

Don't forget!

Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure is coming out as well  :vik:

[Univaded_Fox]

One remake with hope (as in "I hope it does not butcher a classic") and promise is Yellow Submarine, which is resurfacing via Performance Capture in 2012.  For those of you who have not screened the original film, do yourselves a favor: jump in your cars or get on a skytrain, and get your paws on copy of this movie, or at least watch this clip from YouTube.  Yellow Submarine can work remade assuming the PC is used to enhance the original film's groovy psychedelic animated context and avoid the uncanny valley effect that has caused so much discord with director Robert Zemeckis' previous efforts (is this man now going to play out the rest of his career producing exclusively PC content?).  Since the original was made with limited cooperation by The Beatles, the producers will have as much leniency to go helter skelter on the execution.  What I worry about is who will be the target audience of this film.  Will they appeal to the aging boomer generation's nostalgic drug-colored memories, or will they hip it up for a post-millennium ADD text-messaging crowd?  Let us hope they follow the precedent set by Across the Universe and manage to appeal to both without pandering to neither. 

Oh yeah, and of course, it's going to be in 3-D.  Actually, this can work in the underwater context.  Imagine the Yellow Submarine flying through the Sea of Holes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7F2X3rSSCU

[Univaded_Fox]

To continue the parade of disengage, I present the following...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOjcml_X704

[Roffo]

The Zookeeper, I thought that was Aslan from Narnia for a second.