So… what do we think of sequels?
I am ambivalant about them to be honest. Some are just pointless and blatantly rubbish (anyone else thinking of the mega-blockbusters released summer 09?), yet, there are the exceptions to the rule that continue the story of a character or themes that deserve more time on our screens.
I read that a proposed ‘Eastern Promises’ sequel has been suggested – with Cronenberg, Mortensen and Steve Knight all involved.
Now, I loved the first ‘Eastern Promises’. For me it had authenticity and integrity and focused on a seldom seen criminal element.
I am really looking forward to this. How does everyone else feel?
If Viggo’s nude again, I’ll watch it.
(the film, that is…)
I wasn’t interested enough in the first one to be much interested in a sequel.
I think it could make a fine trilogy…
rather see a sequel to eXistenZ or even The Brood. I would pay the most to see a follow up to Crash (96) tho
I agree with Den on the comment of Crash. That is truly a piece of challenging filmmaking.
It’s one of two films I have seen in my entire cinema going life where people walked out in outrage.
The other – Irreversible. But, that’s another story…
People walked out of I Heart Huckabees in droves, it was hilarious.
You know what, I’m going to bring up my problem with Crash now. Most of Cronenberg’s work involves a literalized technophilia that literally penetrates machine with human and creates hybrid responses, which is why I enjoy him and find his movies really wonderful and fascinating. But I’ve been in car accidents before. They are not erotic.
I actually want to read the book before trying to finish the movie (I have never finished it but that is through no fault of the movie’s or my own, the last time I tried I was watching it with a bunch of stoners and they started freaking out).
I have been in two car accidents myself and cheating death always has an element of eroticism
Oh, Eastern Promises 2! The topic, the topic!
I loved Eastern Promises but it was certainly not the type of thing that I thought would have a sequel. If Cronenberg is involved, I am curious and will probably see it. However, as a trilogy is concerned, why not make a third sober ruminition into violence that follows the trend of A History of Violence and Eastern Promises but from a unique angle?
J.G. Ballard knew car accidents weren’t inherently erotic. Ballard’s entire program was about the manifestation of extremely aberrant psychopathology. Anyway, the movie just didn’t get Ballard’s special sense of dissociative disorders. Cronenberg’s crew came off as creepy perverts. Not at all the same thing.
Well at least there’s room enough for a sequel allowed from the original’s ending. I’d be interested in following Mortensen’s character around a bit more, not a bad idea at all I think.
Better that than Denzel chasing Tom, or some such foolishness.
what is that a reference to kj
since we are discussing odd sequels and it would be silly to make a new thread for just this question.
I found the Inside Man to be a capable thriler with Jodie Foster at her best. And it was nice to see Spike Lee (one of my favorite directors) have a box office hit. But does the world need Inside Man 2, which he is currently working on right now?
I suppose there was room left from the original Inside Man to allow for a sequel, but I don’t really think it warrants one.
But Spike Lee is such a terrible director in my eyes that I’m always amused whenever I hear he’s making a new film. I mean he’s really the equivalent of Ron Howard, wherein his films are told with a maudlin-type of biased sentimentality in that every character speaks in “cliched movie speak” – I really have to force myself to watch any of his films. Early on at least he had some talent to distract from it, now he’s just shite. But yeah, Spike Lee films, Ron Howard films – not my cup of tea, perhaps it’s the conventionality, the insistence on explaining the most obvious narrative turns that it seems neither director has any faith at all in the audience’s ability to comprehend basic narrative structure.
Yep, that fits.
Can I just say I’d like to throw Terrence Blanchard into a cell in Siberia? I hate his each and every one of his saccharine scores. That Lee allows and encourages this gets him a cell of his very own, right beside his composer.
I disagree I think his films have a real jazz element to them and his documentaries are very powerful. Howard would never touch anything like She Hate Me or bamboozled.
I implore u to watch Passing Strange (it is on most pbs stations tonight) and tell me u don’t like Spike Lee at least a little.
Harry: you are right it is completely self contained, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to see it. Garfield was self-contained they still made a second one of those
>>I would pay the most to see a follow up to Crash (96) tho<<
Wherever could they take it? (Not that I wouldn’t watch it if Cronenberg made it.) EASTERN PROMISES at least has characters that can be moved on to other situations or adventures (for lack of a better word). CRASH seems complete within itself.
Lee has never made one point in his entire career that he didn’t feel the need to underline. In bold. With italics.
eastern promises 2: promises never sleep
i really enjoyed videodrome and although i never saw it at it’s time of release, i do understand that it was an attempt at social commentary of technology/consumerism of the time. it would be nice for cronenberg to revisit his early horror film days again with something along the lines of videodrome, the brood or rabid.
Crash is my favorite Cronenberg film, and one of my favorite films in general. That said, I’d hate to see it get a sequel. Although I’m rarely of the mind that a sequel can retroactively affect the legacy of the original, Crash’s ending is so pitch-perfect I’m loathe to think of the extension of such a grand, cyclical film.
What’s become of Cronenberg’s novel? It was announced as underway in ’07.
>>Garfield was self-contained they still made a second one of those<<
OK, you’ve officially churned my brain into prune-whip yogurt by referencing GARFIELD in connection with CRASH…
One GARFIELD was too many but the character has like 20 years’ worth of …
No, no, no … I will not even involve myself in this discussion … It’s insane …
(looks around for tall building to fling self from)
Cronenberg’s worst work so far, a sequel would be the ultimate decline…
How about a sequel to Dead Ringers? heh
Polaris said, “Most of Cronenberg’s work involves a literalized technophilia that literally penetrates machine with human and creates hybrid responses, which is why I enjoy him and find his movies really wonderful and fascinating. But I’ve been in car accidents before. They are not erotic.”
and KJ said, “Ballard’s entire program was about the manifestation of extremely aberrant psychopathology. Anyway, the movie just didn’t get Ballard’s special sense of dissociative disorders. Cronenberg’s crew came off as creepy perverts. Not at all the same thing.”
There’s a long history of connection between cars and sex (at least in the US; think especially of popular music). To me, Crash extends the metaphor to a logical conclusion (crash=orgasm). Cronenberg also incorporates his long time fascination with the fusion of man and technology. The film is not meant to be realistic in any way—i.e. it’s not about actual people with serious psycho-sexual pathologies. The actors are more like props than realistic characters. Essentially, it’s a huge performance-art piece, more than a film. It’s a worthy idea and the film succeeds to a large extent, imo. To me, it’s Cronenberg’s best film.
Re: Spike Lee
I agree with KJ and others about the way he has to underscore things. He’s often too didactic and simplistic, imo. However, I do think he has talent—more talent than someone like Ron Howard (who is not a terrible director, imo).
That makes a lot of sense, thank you Jazzahola. Still, when I watch Videodrome, The Fly, eXistenZ, etc., I feel like what the characters are doing is sexy in its own strange way, whereas when I watch Crash all I think is “the last thing I think before I hit another car is not ‘Jeez, I wanna have sex with this other driver.’” I would suppose the issue is in expectations. It’s never really good to approach someone’s work with the theory in mind that s/he’s going to do the same thing in a different context.
Dimitris: How is Eastern Promises worse than Fast Company in any way, shape or form?
I don’t get how either History Of VIolence or Eastern Promises are serious looks at violence. they are just pretentious genre flicks IMO, and neither are as distinctive or as original as his earlier films. I liked ‘Eastern Promises’, but it felt scenes were missing to me. The trailer, the synopsis and the entire set up, made it feel like Watts character was central, but she was purely a narrative device. She got the ball rolling. after that, she didn’t feel significant at all. I can’t figure out whether she was underwritten or just too broadly played by Watts. i’m guessing it’s a mix of both. Viggo was great thoiugh.
“How is Eastern Promises worse than Fast Company in any way, shape or form?”
haven’t seen it yet but i seriously doubt History and Eastern are better films than his earlier ones.
his two recent flicks are for hardcore mainstream fans and only, end of story.
I’m really into hardcore mainstream. Like seriously hardcore shit man. I’m talking Eastern Promises, The White Ribbon, all that real hardcore mainstream shit.