|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Upcoming sequels
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 10-11-2002 06:45 PM
Courtesy of the NATO "IN FOCUS" magazine, here is a list of sequels that are coming in the next couple of years, with release dates where applicable. All dates in 2003 unless otherwise noted.The Jungle Book II (animated sequel) - Feb. 7 Shanghai Nights - February Ripley's Game ("sort of a sequel" to The Talented Mr. Ripley) - April 4 Jeepers Creepers 2 - April 18 X-Men 2 - May 2 The Matrix Reloaded - May 15 Fast and the Furious 2 - June 6 The Rugrats Meet the Wild Thornberrys - June 13 Charlie's Angels 2: Halo - June 27 Legally Blonde 2: Red White & Blonde - July 2 T3: The Rise of the Machines - July 2 Exorcist 4:1 - July 18 Bad Boys 2 -- July 18 Spy Kids 3 - July 23 Tomb Raider 2 - July 25 American Wedding (sequel to American Pie) - Aug. 1 The Whole Nine Yards 2 - Summer The Matrix Revolutions - Nov or Dec Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - Dec. 17 Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - December (I had previously heard this was pushed back to summer 2004) Texas Chainsaw Massacre 5 - Oct. 31 Sometime in 2003:
Meet the Fockers (sequel to "Meet the Parents")
Freddy vs. Jason
Final Destination 2 (winner of the "Stupidest Title" award)
Gods & Generals (prequel to Gettysburg) The Amazing Spider-Man - May 7, 2004 Shrek II - June 18, 2004 Also in 2004:
Mission Impossible 3
Rush Hour 3 Star Wars Episode III - Memorial Day weekend 2005 And here is the last paragraph in the article...see if this makes your skin crawl: "And finally, defying narrative logic and dead main characters, James Cameron announced at a press conference in September that he has begun work on the script for 'Titanic 2.'"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 10-13-2002 02:04 PM
That James Cameron quote may be authentic, he is known for bieng a jokester about his upcoming projects.Actually, here is a doozy, and this is actually true. DIE HARD 4. No kidding. Bruce Willis's production company agreed to make a fourth installment in order to gain the rights to a NAME to a film that they wanted for his latest picture. The movie, now called TEARS OF THE SUN, will be called instead MAN OF WAR. I'm sorry, but I liked the first one better, and to trade an entire movie that will probably suck, to get a movie title that DOES suck? Not good. Dave
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 10-14-2002 02:14 AM
Add to the listFirst Wives Club 2
George of the Jungle 2
Gladiator 2
Godzilla 2
Ice Age 2
Independence Day 2
Indiana Jones 4
I know What You Did Last Summer 3
Jumanji 2
Jungle Book 2
Mad Max 4
Rocky 6
Scary Movie 3 - Episode I: Lord of the Brooms
Scooby Doo 2
Small Soldiers 2
Seriously, Dude, Wheres My Car?
True Lies 2 Of course, some of these have been discussed already. ------------------
Find me online
AOL: Dexter Caldwell
yahoo!: dexter_caldwell "It is the opinion of the entire staff the Dexter is criminally insane."
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 10-14-2002 10:45 AM
"First Wives Club 2" sounds about as dumb as "Final Destination 2" or "The Neverending Stoy 2"...Hopefully we won't see a "Nutty Professor 3" or "The Flintstones 3: Viva la Franchise" Personally, I think sequels would be better without the number. Like "The Matrix Reloaded" is instead of "The Matrix 2: Reloaded" but I guess if people don't see a number after the original title, they're too dumb to realize it's a sequel. ("Hey, didn't these same three girls play in 'Charlie's Angels'?")  =TMP:2= P.S. Are we going to need new lenses and plates for "Exorcist 4:1"? 
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 10-14-2002 05:33 PM
In some cases having the number is a good idea. Lets take star trek for example. Without the number, we wouldn't be able to know which ones were the odd number ones and therefore sucked on entirely new levels.Star trek 2 4 and 6 all were good to very good, 8 was very good, although it had no number. 10 also should be good. And this is what I am tired of.. all of this SL2 (stuart litttle 2). D2 (the mighty ducks). hey wait a minute, the first one was called the mighty ducks, and the second one is also called the mighty ducks???? I AM SPINNING. Terminator 2, or T2 started it all. THANKS A LOT CAMERON. Dave
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic