It’s about the same quality as Anchorman 2. Meaning it just seemed like a remake of the first movie. A lot of the scenes I watched and might have laughed a bit, but there was always a better scene from the first movie to compare it to. I think that took away from my enjoyment.
Oh yeah, that was god awful. Fuck Crackle for releasing that garbage out into the world. I’m glad that streamer failed for Sony and the only buyers they could find were the publishers of the Chicken Soup for The Soul book series.
I think Ben Stiller just completely missed the mark with Zoolander 2 and it’s good that he realizes it. It happens, not everything’s gonna land the way you thought it would. But people really need to just stop making sequels to comedies years if not decades after the originals. It rarely ever works because comedy changes over time. Some humor doesn’t age well but more importantly some premises just don’t work well outside of the era they were conceptualized in because they were a reflection of that period. There are some exceptions of course but I’ve been burned too many times by shitty - purposeless sequels.
I liked the first Zoolander movie and I’m surprised I didn’t even realize they made a second one. I may have to watch it just because it exists and maybe now that I have a super low expectation it will not be so bad.
After seeing Dumb & Dumber Too, I found Dumb & Dumberer to be a better sequel. I still quote Bob Saget from Dumberer; there’s nothing worth repeating in Too.
Hey the first like, ~40 minutes of the fourth Matrix isn’t that bad. It’s just after the Wachowski’s were finished making fun of the concept of lame milquetoast sequels trying desperately to do more of the same, they actually went and made one.
I recall him saying a year or two back that he ultimately thinks it's a good thing it failed, too, because, if it'd done well, he probably wouldn't have gone onto do more serious things like Escape At Dannemora and Severance.
I agree in part, I think that making a sequel decades after the original IRL and story-wise and updating the ideas and humour to not be the same as in the original might be worth it. But that would require an actual new idea that somehow aligns with characters strong enough to make it reasonable to make a sequel and not a new IP.
I did not think so. It wasnt as bad as Zoolander 2, it had a few good moments but it felt more like “part 2” than a sequel… like it was a bunch of more of the same than anything bigger or better.
If you watch them back to back now it plays better than when it first came out.
Super Troopers 2 has the same problem. It essentially is the same movie so the good jokes don’t hit hard since they’re just more of the same, and the new jokes felt like they were just cut out of the first one for not being good enough.
Super Troopers 2 at least felt like a fun revist though, probably because you know the Broken Lizard guys really are friends and it probably wasnt just a pay cheque for them. Even their more mediocre standalone films get a huge boost from that.
They put all their good ideas into the first one. Club Dread was a dud. Literally got one laugh out of me, and it was an ADR gag about Jimmy friggin’ Buffet.
And this is why I’m skeptical about Deadpool &Wolverine. Deadpool 2 was good because even though Deadpool was great there was still plenty to make fun of in the superhero genre, but I’m not sure if there’s enough fresh ground left for a 3rd one .
I can watch Deadpool 2 but I absolutely despise that kid. I mean, huge props to the actor because they did such a great job if I feel this strongly about him. But seriously, fuck that kid.
The article is about an interview he did on David Ducovny’s upcoming ‘Fail Better’ podcast… Which is specifically about people who’ve experienced high profile failures.
Add comment