Is Internet fandom creating a double standart to Modern Blockbuster sequels?

[Lord]

It seems like it, years ago, when Indiana Jones 2 and 3 came out their reception was relativelly mixed, most of it was in magazines, the same happened with the sequels to Back to the Future. However, many kids grew up with those movies, as they grew up, opinion on these films started to change and they are all relativelly well received today. Places like Rotten Tomatoes didn't exist back in the day, so the scores there are mostly from modern or updated reviews.

The Empire Strikes Back also became much better received today, and even films that are still not considered great like Ghostbusters II have a certain following and rarelly appear in "Worst Sequels" lists.

Now let's go to modern days, the kids that watched those films are now adults, are are themselves more critical, and the films they grew up with inspire them now.

And nowadays you have new franchises, the ones i want to discuss are Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean, you get The Matrix Reloaded and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, neither one of them was exactly hated by critics when they came out, their reception wasn't all that different from the one the Indiana Jones and Back to the Future sequels received.

The difference between then and now is internet, when you have articles on the net constantly listing both on "Worst Sequel" lists or trashing on them it's difficult for different opinions to be easily accepted. Imagine if internet was around for the critics of the 80s, i really doubt that these now classic films would have been so easily accepted, as you would have gotten the critics and adults of the time dictating what is good and what is bad.

It's become popular to talk about double standarts or critics being "wrong", but i honestly don't think they're the problem, i think that it's the general atitude in fandom. I mean, you can say "First film was great, but all the sequels sucked" enough times before it becomes "true", when you get down to it in Indiana Jones and Back to the Future, the first films of each are also usually considered the best, with the other ones being entertaining and enjoyable, not that different from Matrix and PotC, difference being that those don't have 30+ years of nostalgia, and those who grew up with those films will just get shut down when they come to the internet.

This is just something i've been thinking for a while, Matrix Reloaded and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest aren't masterpieces, but i think the fandom in the internet vastly underrates them as movies, and in my opinion, that may not be letting the more positive opinions grow.

 

[Octoberist]

I blame the internet and the 'outrage' machine (designed by the Kryptonians for human knee-jerk responses and the overuse of the word hyperbole, in which most people probably can't pronounce right.)

 

[terry78]

we are all blinded by nostalgia basically.

 

[Mr.M]

I think both examples are valid and there is definitely something to this. But again? What is the alternative to these franchises? Critics can't really point to other franchises in the modern era that are any less polarizing yet considered superior than those two modern franchise examples above.

So what is the gold standard besides the nostalgia of past franchises? Have audiences just become so cynical that nothing else can really top what's already come? Very important question for Hollywood to consider...

 

[Lord]

we are all blinded by nostalgia basically.

It's not exactly that, but i think that the kids that grew up with these films now being the ones reviewing new films contributed not letting the positive opinions grow. It's very similar to how i see people who were kids when Star Wars came out labeling Halo or Transformers as the new Star Wars, while ignoring what was actually closer to that during the 2000s like Harry Potter.

If critics were making "Worst Sequel lists" back then i'm quite sure Temple of Doom and Back to the Future II would have easily made the cut, they're now almost untouchable because many have grown up with them. I'm not saying these films i stated are better, but they're certainly far from being the messes many now make them out to be, now and then you actually see an opinion showing how they're actually quite enjoyable, but such statements are quickly shut down with barely a discussion.

 

[Octoberist]

We live by a revisionist history.

 

[Octoberist]

Long live Temple of Doom.

Long live Back to the Future Part 2. (Though part 3 is still mixed.)

 

[Lord]

I do agree that standarts can improve over time as well as expectations for movies, but in these cases, i think people are having a bigger problem at accepting flawed incredibly entertaining movies. Being some of the first in Hollywood's new trend in shooting final films back-to-back and offering cliffhanger finales also made it get some more hate, much of the criticism about them leading directly into the following film is being used less often for newer films due to this having becomes so common.

 

[Octoberist]

standards

 

[terry78]

I'm glad you're the bad guy and not me, I was chomping at the bit, dude.

 

[Lord]

I'm glad you're the bad guy and not me, I was chomping at the bit, dude.

I don't exactly see the point of you posting here if it's only to spam. Give a decent argument, otherwise stop wasting your time and mine.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I can see what you're saying Lord (and I happen to love Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions...one of the few who likely do...also love DMC, but I hated the last 2 Pirates films) but I would argue Last Crusade was always pretty well liked. Temple of Doom, that is a fair point. Last Crusade, not so much.

Overall though, there is probably truth that the internet makes these films becoming more liked over the years more difficult.

 

[terry78]

I don't exactly see the point of you posting here if it's only to spam. Give a decent argument, otherwise stop wasting your time and mine.

Relax, I'm just messing with you.

 

[DA_Champion]

Matrix 2 is a good, solid movie. The reason it's hated is probably because of the architect scene, at least in part. In the previous movie anybody's philosophy could stand for the blue pill and red pill, whereas in the second movie they state explicitly what the problems, thus leaving most people out.

There's also the fact that critics are simply sometimes wrong.

Another example of fan power, Star Wars prequels and Man of Steel as the most ultrascrutinized movies of all time. The critics liked the SW prequels specifically, but as far as the fans are concerned, those are some of the worst movies ever.

 

[Marvin]

When the young kids of today grow up and start their own hype accounts and movie blogs, we'll get a whole new paradigm of the childhood classics. Not so much the Faraci's and forum browsers telling each other that the films of today either don't measure up or have nill imagination.

It's the youthful experience that really drives the classic film experience imo. "Hook" and most of the Burton films for example. Released today and they would no doubt be overlooked or ridiculed. I envy the kids today who get to watch all these summer films with innocent eyes. Must be quite the thing. I can only imagine what their Lion Kings and such are in the animation front.

 

[DA_Champion]

I can only imagine what their Lion Kings and such are in the animation front.

Transformers and the Marvel films I think.

 

[redhawk23]

Just look at the thousands of videos of kids sitting in back seats singing Let It Go.

 

[Lord]

Having grown in the 2000s i remember that the big thing in animation was probably Shrek, along with some PIXAR classics like Incredibles and Finding Nemo. Aside from the instant classic like Frozen here and there, the major franchises i see kids and even people from my age liking are Ice Age and Madagascar, i honestly have mixed feeling about those franchises.

When it comes to major movies and following, if what people talk about the Star Wars years is true, then the closest to that was probably the Harry Potter books and movies in terms of hype. Though for some reason, the last Twilight movie made more money in my country than the final HP film.

To this day i still defend Dead Man's Chest, the only thing i really didn't like was the clifhanger ending and the Jack + Elizabeth tension, otherwise i find most criticism on the internet kind of exagerated, Davy Jones and the Kraken scenes were great points in that movie and i sometimes get the idea that they are not talked about more often because the internet is constantly trashing on every single PotC sequel. The following films are a mixed bag, i loved some of the ideas in the 3rd film, but they obviously had to rush the script, so they weren't well enough executed, the 4th film was my least favorite, i liked Barbossa in there a lot, as well as the mermaids, but Blackbeard was the weakest villain in the series. On the whole though, i found them entertaining.

From what i've read of The Last Crusade, it does seem that, while the reception was mostly positive, it was still a bit mixed, with many feeling like it was a retread to Last Crusade.

From personal experience and people i know, as well as the box office results, Pirates of the Caribbean is usually very popular with kids and even adults, but on the internet most discussions about it devolve into: "the first film was great and the sequels didn't matter".

Matrix Reloaded is probably in an even worse situation, most people i know seem to like it or think it's even the best of the series, however, on the internet it's one of the worst sequels of all time, with that film the only thing i didn't like was the "To be continued" bit, but otherwise it was a strong sequel. The critical reception of the time was also mostly positive.

About the Prequels, Episode I and II now have a decent score, but some 4 years ago before the 3D re-release of Episode I came out, they were in the 30s%. Not sure what happened so suddenly,

 

[dark_b]

everytime hardcore fanboys hate a sequel its because its :
a) a bad movie
b) a very different movie compared to the first movie

we the fanboys dont like change. BOOM. t:

 

[Teelie]

I think looking for an answer on THIS forum will get you flawed results. This isn't a place that the casual film-goer visits or posts on. There is a perception that you see filtered through here which isn't necessarily representative of the general audience.

I think Iron Man 3 is the best example. The movie is very much controversial here from the posts I've seen. Several members are outspoken in how much they hate it but the general audience, going by ticket numbers, loved it. That movie is very popular outside of this little corner of the internet.

Now look at Pacific Rim where there's a lot of love here (still with detractors, only less vocal) but the general audience was more or less indifferent to it. No real love or hate over that. It's made a profit but it didn't pull in huge numbers like Iron Man 3.

Then you have movies like Dredd which despite being almost ignored by everyone (general audience and the more local Hype one) has it's vocal fans who keep hoping for a sequel and think it's underappreciated.

Three big potential movies with three different responses.

 

[henzINNIT]

Matrix Reloaded and Dead Man's Chest are two decent enough rides that don't stand alone. They're half films. Of course they will be hated if they don't offer any resolution themselves, and the following films that do are much worse. I don't think any era would look at them differently.

Nostalgia will effect people's perception of things, but for the most part bad films are still looked back on as bad films (even with fans).

 

[Victarion]

No, Chris Nolan did.

 

[Octoberist]

I don't exactly see the point of you posting here if it's only to spam. Give a decent argument, otherwise stop wasting your time and mine.

Why so serious?

Terry reminds me of myself: a cool cat trying to have a good time.

 

[Octoberist]

When the young kids of today grow up and start their own hype accounts and movie blogs, we'll get a whole new paradigm of the childhood classics. Not so much the Faraci's and forum browsers telling each other that the films of today either don't measure up or have nill imagination.

It's the youthful experience that really drives the classic film experience imo. "Hook" and most of the Burton films for example. Released today and they would no doubt be overlooked or ridiculed. I envy the kids today who get to watch all these summer films with innocent eyes. Must be quite the thing. I can only imagine what their Lion Kings and such are in the animation front.

That would be Frozen, which is a fine film, but a more enchanting film to a young girl or boy.

 

[DA_Champion]

More films than Frozen are loved.