Sequils, that are different?

M

moochiemoo

New member
Just been looking through reviews and Sky Movies, and the two movies that cought my eye were Crual Interntions and The Skulls, both have 2 sequils but are compleatly different to the others, so why are they made sequils? And there very bad anyway, being released straight to video, and dont have the stars the first ones did. They should just make them seperate movies or not make them at all, they just clog up my searches :rolleyes:
 
Nice spelling! But yes I agree on 'cash in' sequels, they just tarnish the name of the original. Theres always some goons who go out and rent them though. Dont! It will just encourage them!
 
Cruel Intentions 2 was made for TV but was shelved due to its raunchy nature. They then re-jigged it and spiced it up even more for the straight to DVD release. The result is a mess but is viewable. The story is almost the same as the first film.
 
It was pegged as a prequel/alternative version of the story.

Same story, cheaper actors I say!

Just an excuse to get mugs (like me) to buy it (in my defence it was only
 
I think Cruel Intentions 2 is a prequel.

The "original" (1999) Cruel Intentions is amazing, one of my favourite films. I haven't seen Manchester Prep.


xx
 
i like halloween 3 .....

and is it just me, or do the three lord of the ring films have a different "feel" to them ..... there's a big difference between fellowship and two towers (grandeur and personal) and a mixture of both grandeur and personal in return of the king .....
 
You have nothing to be sorry about - Dazsin is the pedant who doesn't know how to use apostrophes and complaining about it in the wrong thread ;) :) :p

The idea behind the sequel is usually ca$h pure and simple; it's amazing many low budget films with similar plots have been rebranded as 'follow-ups' burely to cash-in on the success!
That said - there's always an exception that proves the rule... ;)
 
Back
Top