Thats why the 3rd Hobbit movie is called "The Bloating of the Five Pages" because the 3rd one is literally the last 5 pages of the book HEAVILY expanded..
I'd love it if the next Bond was written to have a specific era spanning arc. It'd be cool to see Bond in the 60's - 80's to see how the height and fall of the Cold War and the changing times change him.
DC/WB were in a rush to catch up with Marvel but that wasn't their only mistake. Marvel had the 12A/PG-13 rated market locked down. DC tried to cash in on the same market by presenting something that looked different - more grown-up - but was fundamentally the same. It's only recently that they've started putting out quality content with 15/R-rated entries, allowing their creative teams some freedom, rather than trying to copy a formula.
I’m one of the very few that Love Alien 3. I’m fine with Ripley dying at the end. And I get the other two deaths story wise ( main reason was actors wanting more money and being told no ). My issue is 4. It’s pretty much the Rise of Skywalker of Aliens. Useless rebooting of characters.
Assembly Cut that is closer to Fincher's original vision is way better than what was released. It's too bad Fox interfered with it constantly despite not having a clue what they wanted it to be. That right there should have told them that this was the place to end the story. There's only so much you can tell in this particular universe. The only other place to go from 3 is Prometheus, which again, they screwed up by caving to impatient fans that trashed Prometheus for not having the Xenomorph. Ridley was going to build to it. Instead, the story got rushed due to fans and they still didn't like what they got. Let the series rest. Same with Predator if this film, Prey, fails. Let the movies stand on their own.
I find it infuriating that The Last Jedi isn't seen as the death of the sequel trilogy it should be known as, and it is The Rise of Skywalker that is seen as the movie the sequel trilogy went wrong. No, The Last Jedi wasn't a bold new direction or creative in any way. It was just a creatively bankrupt attempt at Cinematic High Art using a subversion in the same way someone would use a sledgehammer to create a painting. The Last Jedi is like if someone wanted to make a good cake and ended up making a mud pie, and they thought that making a mud pie was good because it subverted people's expectations. If someone else comes along and tries to fix that mud pie by putting some whip cream on it and a cherry, you don't blame them for ruining the cake. The cake was ruined to begin with.
Star Wars is Kennedy's fault? What about JJ Abrams? The guy who thought that a medicine that can bring people back to life in ST: Into Darkness was a great idea. Does that someone who knows how to plan out a plot?
Many people lost respect for Shane Black after Iron Man 3's Mandarin fake-out. I didn't mind that. I DID mind him taking a beloved movie - that he himself had starred in - and turning it into a bad stand-up routine with added aliens. Shane Black's Hawkins was the intentionally un-funny comic relief in Predator, half-swallowing his lewd jokes when he realises he's not getting a laugh. And then he gets killed off. Black seemed to think he was he best part of Predator and promptly gave everyone bad jokes to crack - only this time we're apparently supposed to laugh.
I hear this complaint about DC movies and how they rushed the Justice League movie out without giving us time to get to see and know characters like the Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg before putting them on screen. Part of me gets this, however the other part of me asks...WTF? This wasn't Marvel unshelving it's B team like ironman, Thor, and Captain Amercia. Those are all iconic names for Marvel comic followers, but outside of comic book fans I doubt anyone knew much about anyone other than Captain America. I knew all three names but I knew noting about Thor past his Norse myth, I knew of Ironman but other than he was a rich tech guy I didn't know anything. In short, even Marvel admits they dusted off the B team to head their outing. We needed those movies to get invested in that team. In Justice League who do we have? Superman, check. Batman, check. Wonder Woman, check. The Flash, check. Aquaman, check. Oh right and then Cyborg. Excluding Cyborg, why would we have needed an establishing set of movies to make us care about these characters. Replace Cyborg with Green Lantern, and add Martian Manhunter and you have the big seven of the Justice Leauge that every one knows. Maybe there are people who don't know Martian Manhunter but since when do we need to get excited to know Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman? What DC fan doesn't already know Hal and Barry? Aquaman, well he is a bit fishy but people know him too.(pun intended)
I think the Bond films have plenty more problems than failing at trying to link the films. It’s stuck with it’s old stereotypes for too long and become stale. It should have just quit while those stereotypes were relevant.
That ending of that Predator movie when they felt the Predators a species that always hunted humans for sport would give humans an iron man like suit ??? Like why? They were never on outside they didn’t like humans …humans were just something to hunt …they didn’t care about humans so why would they give them any weapon to “help” them?? It was just stupid!
Terminator 1 and 2 exist. Alien 1 and 2 exist. Predator 1 and 2 exist. Halloween 1 2 4 5 exist. Star Wars 1- 6 exist. That's it there are no other movies in those franchises.
Being a big fan of Jean-Pierre Jeunet, I’ll always love “Alien Resurrection”. It’s not “Amelie” or “Delicatessen”, but it’s a lot of fun with a great cast.
I'll never get over the fact that Predators had everything they needed to make it into a money making series again. Fantastic cast, fantastic action and really the ability to introduce any number of ideas and characters that could of spiraled into it's own deeper mythology. But no, let's forget about it and make a dumbed down action movie with what's her name that's terrible at acting.
Solid list. In a few years you’ll have to toss the FANTASTIC BEASTS films and the TRANSFORMERS films into an updated list. Plenty of mistakes made with those two franchises.
@@RHCole If we could just drop the awful Magneto-Xavier storyline from Fantastic Beasts, it would be a great series of movies. The four of them should be spanning the globe rescuing beasts and helping people impacted by them and those who exploit them. Leave the Dumbledore/Grindelwald conflict to legend - it is only diminished by the telling.
Stretching The Hobbit to 3 films was undoubtedly a mistake but another massive mistake (imo) is PJ CGI'ing over everything and not using the brilliant costumes to their fullest (as per LotR). The extras, where he shows extras clad in amazing Goblin costumes, are fantastic - only for him to splat all over that with overly CGI'd replacements (which looks far worse) :(
Yup, Cgi was hillariously overused in those films, Lotr used just the right amount of cgi and used it where it was neccessary, the hobit just cgi'd everything. best example imo of how Lotr used Cgi. the horde of uruk high at the battle of helms deep- the first few ranks of them were actual people (and the vast majority of the actual ones fighting in relatively close shots), the rest who never really get close up shots etc. are cgi.
Guardians of the Galaxy introduced 5 new heroes in one movie. DC failure has nothing to do with the fact that they didn’t follow marvel formula of introducing characters in their own movie. It’s failure is because Bats vs Supes and JLA are just bad movies.
The premise of B v S was flawed from the beginning. Such a story to be told well would involve a long term relationship between the two (like Rogers/Stark in Civil War).
The Hobbit thing was sad because clearly Jackson was right to make it 2 movies, but the studio forced him to make it 3 after the first film released. I guess financially they were right, but it still meant WETA was forced into overwork and Jackson was sent to the hospital. (Plus the first movie was still great, it just got increasingly terrible with 2 and 3)
I believe the change from 2 to 3 films was made after #1 was finished shooting but in post production. When I saw the first movie, I already knew it was there were going to be three.
LOTR justified three movies, largely down to it being a novel which was in three distinct sections. The Hobbit, on the other hand, was a short story (by Tolkein’s standards) and I’d argue even two movies was stretching things a bit. The fact it takes longer to watch the movies than it does to read the book is pretty telling, as is the inclusion of characters who had nothing to do with the original story. That said, I did enjoy them, so maybe I should just shut up…
Yes. Total cash grab. When tey said two movies, I said that is too long. Then three movies??? WTF. The Hobbit is a nice tight tale that gives you an introduction to the later world. Can't say I enjoyed them one bit, and I am not a Tolkien purist.
I would add the 3 Star Trek films between 2009 and 2016. Rushed action oriented nonsense trying to recreate something that took years to establish originally. Talk about Glorified Fan Fiction... The main problem being they were mostly "Star Wars" fans with no idea what "Trek" was and is all about.
I think those are more like common reboot mistakes. “Let’s take something people liked when they were younger, make it darker (or ‘more adult’), while removing everything people loved about it in the first place.” IMO ‘dark’ just doesn’t work in the Star Trek Universe.
I agree. Star Trek has had more than it's share of action and dark/sad moments, but the overall feel of Trek is gone when that is all it's about. I found some of the characters insulting too, lol. I really enjoyed Chris Pine as Kirk. He portrayed him well without doing a bad William Shatner impression. Others however were over the top caricatures of characters that were already comical stereotypes. The music was wonderful though. lol. Michael Giacchino's score is worth it. ha.
I actually liked the first one , I liked the twist of it being Kirk instead of Spock dying then coming back . Other then that I agree with you on the second and third .
I think a lot of the problems with the Star Trek reboot movies come from the limits placed on what Paramount could and couldn't do in regards to Star Trek when CBS and Paramount split up. If I was paramount, I would forget these films even existed (and cancel any plans to make a 4th), convince the people at the top of the new Paramount/CBS combined entity to remove any limits on who can do what with Trek and then go ahead and make something unconnected to these 3 that doesn't basically ignore everything that came before it.
The death of Ripley in Alien 3 was a contractually mandated story beat directly requested by Sigourney Weaver as a condition of her involvement. So the suits had no choice with that one.
TROS also basically de-canonized the storyline introduced in the 2017 Star Wars Battlefront 2 game. And it's only because of one small detail. In the first few levels of the game, you see pieces of the giant dish floating around in space, from the Death Star 2 explosion... but then TROS showed us that the HUGE chunk of the dish part of the Death Star somehow didn't explode and landed on some random planet other than Endor.
I mean... _Rise of Skywalker_ probably has a lot of problems, but I'm not sure that contradicting a 2017 sequel to a remake of a licensed video game as "canon" is one of them
@@MegaZeta I mean the storyline in the 2017 Battlefront 2. It's canon. The video game details regarding the wreckage of the second Death Star happened to make more sense than what they put in TROS anyhow.
If you recall the scene from Rogue One, where the Superlaser Dish is joined to the Deathstar, then the game is still canon. What we see wrecked on the planet surface is just the bit of the DS that housed the dish, not the dish itself.
I am going to insistently believe that the entire sequel trilogy is just a revenge fantasy Palpatine had while falling down the pipe. And if enough people insistently believe this, maybe someone at Disney will get a clue and make it happen.
Aliens does have an alternative timeline where Newt and Hicks survive in the comic book universe - Newt grows up and is shown as an 18-year-old woman. It's a shame they went down the route of killing Newt especially as of course Ripley had already lost her biological daughter Amanda during cryosleep.
You know, maybe they shouldnt kill main characters just like that. That was a major mistake with star wars and the shameful death of han solo. If you make a character capable of surviving many times due to plot armor, then DONT KILL HIM/HER WHEN THEY GROW OLD! they are the embodyment of the idea that good triumphs in the end when you fight for it.
To be fair, Han Solo was killed off because Harrison Ford demanded the character die in the film. I agree with your point, though. Unless the tragic death is going to serve the plot in some way, let your heroes have their retirement and a peaceful death in old age.
Terminator: The Multiverse Movie I, II, III, & IV should remain as the primary time-line we know since it follows the Connors from start to finish. (Sort of...) The reboot and the alternate time-line should be considered two different dimensions or universes with similar outcomes, future war with the machines. I have an idea to actually use all three movies series combined into one.
How about no more ''Terminator'' movies, ever? Works for me. I'm 58, no more ''Star Wars''; ''Star Trek''; comic book movies (at least for a while) and definitely no more ''Fast/Furious'' movies, ever! (The last one made less sense than ''Cannonball Run''!) How about a clean, honest, straight-shooting western? I'd pay real money to see that!
Actually I think besides Terminator One and Two, Salvation was the most logical sequel of them all and I think it is a shame it got so mutch shit. Of course they kind of botched the movie but showing the future from which Kyle Reese was sent seemed like a promising concept to me and actually I think Salvation is the third best Terminator movie to this day.
"The Lord of The Rings" was one book with three volumes. The three volumes are usually sold as separate books, but the original was one book, as it was written. You sound like the Tolkien Super Fans from Amazon...
@@megatronjenkins2473 I just get tired of big conglomerates acting like they know what they are talking about. They don't do really much research for these lists and it shows.
I had no problem with Michael and Laurie being related. Although in the first one, Tommy tells Laurie that if she goes to the Myers the boogeyman will get her. She climbs the steps and put the key in the mailbox unaware Michael is watching. To me that’s why he was after her.
Carpenter always intended Michael to just be the embodiment of evil. He came up with the bro-sis twist in a fit of writer’s block that he and Debra Hill hated in the long run. It never bothered me, but it’s better with that just pure evil where Michael just goes after anyone he sets sights on
The franchise missing from this list is the Divergent series. 1. Trying to jump on the bandwagon and split the 3rd movie into 2 parts. 2. Changing the plot from the original book with the main characters. 3. When the first one was a flop, trying to create a TV series that was never to be effectively leaving the franchise unfinished.
A lot of us that grew up on Halloween actually like the fact that she was related to Michael Myers although every sequel after part two except for the Standalone Season of the Witch, which I actually like by the way, was the downfall to a lot of us except for Jamie Stroud we actually loved her and we was pissed how Jamie Lee Curtis was killed off screen and also how little Jamie was never mentioned again after part 5 I think I'm with these last three they got a two out of three because that last one was not Halloween
So, I love Alien. I love Aliens. Didn’t like Alien 3. For me, James Cameron started the downfall of the the Alien franchise by turning it into a Terminator-like action film.
The problem is that no one makes movies anymore...they all have to be "franchises." It's hard enough to maintain consistency in one movie, but to have 10 different movies written by 10 different people and directed by 10 different people and produced by 10 different people makes this impossible. Someone somewhere along the line is going to f*** up the whole thing.
The allegory of the DCEU: A fellow is standing by the side of the road when another guy walks by with a sack brimming with treasure. "Where'd you get all gold?" he asks. "Oh, there's a cave in the woods that's stuffed with immense wealth! I'll give you a map on exactly how to get there, but it's a journey that lasts an hour." "Oh, no need for that. I'll go my own way because I want to get there in just fifteen minutes..."
The Hobbit mistake was completely changing the nature of Hobbits with Bilbo and the ring. The book was clear that it was an accident that Bilbo found the ring and then forgot about it until he put his hand in his pocket when talking with Gollum. This is important to the entire undertone of the Lord of the Rings books: Hobbits were less tempted to the power of the ring so would have the ability to destroy the ring. The movie changes that and makes it seem like Bilbo stole the ring and used the "What's in my pocket" question on purpose. Complete silliness.
Yeah, the project of _The Hobbit_ as a three-movie prequel led to tone-deaf amounts of investment in things that didn't feel consequential: giving Thorin a showdown with a goblin nemesis, all the inserted material from other Tolkien sources about Gandalf and Saruman and Sauron at the time, etc.
it was all Tom Cruise's fault! He demanded so much control and also that HE should have better screen-time than the young woman playing the Mummy. He is so full of himself that it hurts just to watch him. 🤕😎
@@runulfrraui6602 Basically it became Mission Impossible with a supernatural villain. Cruise was absolutely the wrong casting choice for that movie. Also there was also a pretty good Mummy action series in existence. Why go down that same ground? Either move towards a more intimate Mummy movie (kind of like what they did with The Invisible Man later) or use a different character. Dracula Untold was a better opening for the Dark Universe than The Mummy.
Really, do we need moronically simple music in the background? For some of us, it makes it almost unlistenable. If you *must* have mindless music in the background, please find something other than 5 seconds of chords repeated non-stop. I had to listen to the same stupid chords, what? 200 times? Why?
The Star Wars one still boggles me. While they should be flexible there should be a story plan before you start a series, not letting each film undo and change things on the others
IMO Marvel is better at live action movies and DC rules at animated movies. Each should let the other handle the movies for each type and we would be SET!!
Yes! The dc animated movies are amazing, they should have hired the writers and directors from rhe cartoons and copy and pasted it for the live action versions.
The Disney Star Wars sequels takes the cake for number one, imo. An IP loved world wide, that successfully survived for almost 40 years solely on books and animation and you don't plan shit and just push out that garbage? That's outrageous.
@@franchisefanatic4142 If you view Power Ranger writing/story lines as the pinnacle of man's written work, I could see how you would come to that conclusion....
@@RicoRaynn hey now....most of Power Rangers is far better written than the Star Wars sequel trilogy ( the Nickelodeon & neo-Saban era is mostly pretty much on par with Rise of Skywalker in the garbage department )
@@franchisefanatic4142 The sequels are garbage. No story arc. They are a basic cash grab that destroy the lore built in the original movies. The third movie could be the worst movie ever made. The heroes had to find a McGuffin that could not have existed. Then no one else needed it to occomplish the same thing. The end of the original trilogy is basically raped by this movie.
Watching 2 videos back to back from WhatCulture with Jules narating, and me having a toygh day and feeling like shit, and Jules at the end of videos saying positive things about forgiving others and not beating yourself when making mistakes
No, Rob Zombie's two Halloween iteration films aren't related to the original 1978 iteration. In Rob Zombie's Halloween remake films, Laurie Strode's name isn't really Laurie, her real name is Angel Meyers.
Would solo movies then a team up movie be good, yea but u don’t have to follow the MCU beat for beat. WB hired Snyder, only man with a plan , they botched all his DC movies. They wanted BvS, he wanted MoS2 a& a solo Batman movie, he made BvS, they botched it. Same with JL.
Biggest mistake in the Saw franchise is similar to Predator, the biggest mistake was making ANY sequels. Saw is a good film, thats it. Forget the crappy sequels. Predator is a 2 film franchise, the first sequel is good, ignore the rest.
This was a good list. I do not agree with the Bond franchise and Halloween. I did not mind that they connected the Bond movies, it seemed like a natural evolution with today's cinematic universes. I did not like how Daniel Craig's story ended. With Halloween, I saw it when I was 5 yrs old. Laurie throughout the franchise was Michael Myers' sister. So when it retconned that she was not his sister, I didn't like it.
The hobbit films weren't bloated at all. I loved every minute and I was never a Tolkien fan. However, Star Wars was bloated by at least 6 films and several series.
Percy Jackson: Making a sequel. As a fan of the books, I was thrilled to see The Lightning Thief get an adaptation. Then when I watched it I was left scratching my head towards the end because they failed to establish Luke/Kronos aka the main antagonist for the entire series. Now Luke is in the movie but is killed off at the end but he was already possessed by Kronos in the books so you see where I am going with this.
The Matrix Resurrections comes to mind. The complete movie - just nothing short of maddening. At least Dark Fate can boast that it tried but yeah, it was the final nail in the franchise coffin I think. I'm excited for the new Predictor series, tho.
The main problem with the star wars 7,8 and 9 was the people who spend thousands of dollars on merchandise are the same people who bought the books and read the novel's that came after episode 6 if they had of read and used them to continue the stories it would have made a lot of people happy
Yes, humans do make mistakes. But when you are paid 50 million dollars to make a movie, you hire enough people to effectively catch ALL of the story and continuity mistakes before going ahead with a project.
Idk about that last one Michael's purpose is to kill his family to satisfy Thorne so laury being his sister makes total sense this is also why everyone loved Jamie myself included cuz she was a cute lil innocent version of Michael
I don't follow your logic behind the Saw franchise. Amanda had to die to set up the cat/mouse game between Jill/Hoffman in the later entries. Amanda had no character - her arc literally started and ended with she was the only one to survive a trap. Jill and Hoffman were both better characters than her.
Woke is killing most of franchises these days. That and writers who don't know how to write original and they destroy original works of others as they don't even like them. You can see their butchering of storytelling.
Honestly, I consider the real Alien trilogy to be Alien, Aliens, and Alien Isolation. Even though Isolation is a game, it's a better Alien experience than anything else that came after Aliens.
