Movies that should have been two separate films.

[Cobalt60]

starship troopers

 

[darthgordon]

X-Men 3- You actually have two good premises there. Unfortunately, the combination of the two, with so many characters makes the execution lousy. You start out with the cure and send Cyclops off to battle his demons over Jean's death... then you don't have to kill him off so he can go play with Superman. Then go to the Pheonix saga in the next one because it desperately needed a movie of it's own.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix- just a lot of missing information here. For someone who'd never read the book, it was difficult to follow without someone there to explain it to me.

I've heard rumors about a new "It" movie as well (although, they've been circulating a while with no major work done). It's supposedly supposed to be one movie. I feel that is a big mistake for a book of that size that spans two time frames. Even the mini-series couldn't get everything in.

 

[BRRogers]

Spiderman 3....
They knew about, and tried to chew more than they could bite... The ploy failed.

To be fair though, two movies still wouldn't have made the cast any better :\

 

[The Wolf]

I've had this thought about a couple of movies, unfortunately I forgot which ones.
A co-worker of mine thought "Hancock" should have split: the second film starting when Hancock finds there is another like him.

Wolf

 

[thegreatgalling]

Godfather II

Only because a prequel movie with a Deniro as a young Don Corleone would have been awesome.

 

[LeroyLahood]

Million Dollar Baby.

 

[jlee562]

starship troopers

:confused

This one REALLY puzzles me....how so?

 

[Frank]

Godfather II

Only because a prequel movie with a Deniro as a young Don Corleone would have been awesome.

But i loved the way the flashbacks had something to do with the main plot...

I agree with the Dark Knight being split, you would see alot more Batman/Joker interaction then in 2nd be awed at how Dent was the joker's true plan.

 

[GeneralFROSTY]

Spider-Man 3 gets my vote. Could have even been 3 movies if you gave each villian his own time to shine....

 

[outlander]

Oh yeah I forgot.

Return of the Jedi
Part 1: Awesome, Awesome, Happy-Place!
Part 2: Ewok Capers!

I'm totally with you on that one. It's as if right in the middle of the movie someone pulled the plug on George Lucas' idea tank. After the last gurgle it was refilled with trite, cliche, inane flotsam from the Hollywood money machine.

I was only sixteen and busy making out with a girl I had ditched school with in order to catch an afternoon matinee, and even in 1983 I couln't miss what turned out to be the death throes of George's ingenuity as a film maker. He crashed to the floor; his neck swelled up and he died of anaphylactic shock.

But the SW juggernaut staggered on. Propelled by our love and devotion to 2.5 brilliant films, we sprayed Lysol when an odor began to rise from the spot George had fallen. We averted our eyes when re-released Greedo turned out to be a faster draw than Han Solo, just a really ****ty shot.

When Luke turned out not to have thrown himself off the walkway rather than yield to the Dark Lord but instead had actually slipped on a banana peel...complete with girlish squeal "Yahhhhhhh!"... we knew: George Lucas was an undead mogul. In our slavish devotion we had given him a license to print money.

I will postulate thus: RotJ developed cancer precisely at the stage GL changed it from Revenge of the Jedi to Return of the Jedi. What we saw on screen began to suck not when - as is commonly thought - the first little person swaddled in shag carpeting toddled on camera at Endor but even earlier; on Tattooine, when a badass bounty hunter died a lame death as a Sarlac [sp?] turd.

We didn't know the melanoma was terminal until the first stormtrooper fell to an arrow. We did not realize the extent of the horror until "Yub yub!"... an armored Imperial automaton was crushed by a tree trunk. History did not realize scale of this atrocity until decades later with the conclusion of the Jar Jar Binks trilogy.

 

[Zombie_61]

It's S-a-r-l-a-c-c, but we get the point.

 

[outlander]

:lol See that [SP?] ? It means I understand that it is probably wrong, but understand I may have gotten it accidentally right. If I knew for sure, I could have gone [sic]. :lol

It also means I don't give a flying duck at a rolling donut if any RPF nerd gets his panties twisted by the error so I'm not gonna waste my time researching it so some geek doesn't become traumatized.

But, I thank you for the correction and the tasteful way you threw me a bone by allowinging that people would know what I was talking about. Now, if it had been STAR TREk, MiConan the Grammerian would have come sailing in from the top rope and given me a verbal two handed axe handle smash.

 

[Treadwell]

That's quite an overreaction, outlander. Too much coffee this morning?

 

[Wes R]

flying duck at a rolling donut. I want to see one of these lol. I'm sure I spell things wrong all the time and I know for sure I'm too lazy to check my grammar and punctuation at times but I figure as long as I make sense I'm doing okay.

 

[outlander]

That's quite an overreaction, outlander. Too much coffee this morning?

I dunno... you've been here as long as I have, Tread. Don't you get tired of not being able to post without some guy who has time for making 1,000 posts a year complaining either that some fictional word got misspelled or that some topic was already posted eleven months ago? After about the 20th time, you tend to bristle.

Besides, we're all movie loving nerds here. Just some of us get snarky as a passive agression response and some of us always defend at DEFCOM Level 3.

At least zombiel_61 threw me a bone...that's almost unprecedented amongst those who quibble.

 

[Zombie_61]

:lol See that [SP?] ? It means I understand that it is probably wrong, but understand I may have gotten it accidentally right. If I knew for sure, I could have gone [sic]. :lol

Oh, I know that. I just thought I'd help you out on the off chance you would ever find yourself in a position to need to know how to spell Sarlacc again.

BTW, for the record, I thought your post was well stated, humorous, and spot-on.

 

[blip]

......

 

[Qrest Fourstar]

I would have to say Harry Potter and the Goblet of fire and hary potter and the order of the phoenix.

And it didn't need two movies but HP and the prisoner of Azkaban needed about another half hour. Deathly hollows has greatly benefited from being cut in two and IMHO the movies are much better when they stick closer to the books.

And I am in complete agreement with comments about x-men 3. Half of that film is excellent, but why was jean even in it? She really didnt affect the main story. She was a lame excuse to get rid of scot and the prof.