Will summer sequels redeem themselves?
 No comments posted.
By MELISSA OLSON
Saturday, June 9, 2007 1:28 PM CDT
Special to the Herald
You might not believe this, but I am often accused of cynicism when it comes to movies. My family, in particular, finds it very hard to be around me when I go into one of my “discussions” on the current state of American film. Am I just jaded and skeptical? Maybe. I prefer to think of myself as having high standards.
However, despite this alleged “cynicism,” — and despite my overall disappointment with the summer of 2007 thus far — when it comes to the next batch of big movie releases, I seem to be harboring something of an optimistic streak.
Let me explain. This summer, like many summers lately, is all about sequels. And historically, sequels are always released either because there is more money to be made, or, with certain small indies and long-forgotten sleepers, because there is more story to tell.
In this day and age, though, it’s almost always the former, which is why we end up with endless “Spiderman” and “Shrek” installments. That’s how big sequels work: the franchise is run into the ground, creatively and commercially, and then the studio finds a new franchise. Kind of like locusts.
Which means that so far, this summer has been pretty much like any other. But now something interesting is about to happen with franchises, and it’s going to happen three times in a row. I’m calling them the Apologist Sequels.
See, by the current system, you make a really crappy installment that no one likes, or you write yourself into a corner, and then quit. But this summer we’re getting a bunch of sequels that have no place being made at all. This month it’s “Ocean’s 13” and “Live Free and Die Hard,” and next month we get “The Fantastic Four 2.” Suddenly, it’s almost like the studios are trying to fix some of their mistakes.
And they were mistakes. “Ocean’s 12” was more of a home video of movie stars on vacation than it was a cohesive story. “Die Hard With a Vengeance” ditched the whole “Die Hard” formula to become an unlikely buddy cop cartoon, complete with Samuel L. Jackson. Don’t get me wrong — “Die Hard With a Vengeance” has its appeal as an action flick, but it really has no place in a series about a cowboy cop who can’t work in the system but saves the day when the system fails.
And then there’s “The Fantastic Four.” The original wasn’t a terrible movie, it just wasn’t… well, much of anything. It was kind of boring, actually, and, with lackluster writing and lukewarm acting, more than a little silly. In terms of financial success, the movie may have grossed $154 million, but it cost $100 million to make.
Big budget movies need to rake in seriously big bucks to be worth it, and “The Fantastic Four” was barely worth it. After all, why mess around with a $50 million profit when you could be making another “Spiderman” sequel?
And yet… despite all three of these movies’ problems, they’re getting a followup chapter. Instead of dumping these franchises, the studios are resurrecting them, with a new installment that reverts to form.
“Ocean’s 13” is sending the merry men back to Las Vegas where they belong. “The Fantastic Four” is trying to actually find its heart by returning to one of the comic’s most beloved stories, the Silver Surfer. And “Live Free or Die Hard” is trying to resurrect John McClane as he was: a prickly loner with someone he loves on the line.
I don’t feel like these movies were made because there was more story to be told (except, perhaps, with “The Fantastic Four,” which didn’t have much of a story the first time around). And you can’t really tell me that any one of these three sequels is necessarily a guaranteed moneymaker, especially considering all the summer competition. So… why were they made?
In reality, it’s probably because some studios like to take a gamble, and it seemed like a good bet to try again fresh rather than dump the franchise entirely (Just ask Edward Norton about his all-new “Incredible Hulk” movie). But the tiny, generally quiet little optimist in me kind of hopes that the filmmakers are also trying to make it up to us.
George Clooney realized that he cheated a lot of “Ocean’s 11” fans out of their money to see the rotten sequel, and is now penitent. Twentieth Century Fox finally figured out that a comic book movie still needs a good story, not just Jessica Alba running around in spandex. And Bruce Willis, reflecting on his past mistakes in his advancing age, wants a do-over with his best-loved franchise.
Ok, I admit, it’s unlikely. But what if even one of these movies really is trying to fix past mistakes? What if the filmmakers actually do want our respect back? Even I, with all my cynicism, can’t resist the tiny chance that these movies will redeem their predecessors, or at least clear the air for improved future sequels.
Am I setting myself up for disappointment? Maybe. But, hey, if the studios can take this kind of gamble, so can I.
Melissa Olson was born and raised in Chippewa Falls. She graduated from the University of Southern California with a degree in film and television, and works for a television production company in Madison. E-mail comments and questions to Melissa at mfo.usc@gmail.com.
|
Archives