Pages: [1] 2 3 4 
|
 |
|
 Author
|
Topic: 'DIRECT' Sequel? (Read 5263 times)
|
gAyL I E N 3
Private
Merits: 3
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 5
|
How exactly is PREDATORS a direct sequel? How does it tie into P1 or P2? From what I've seen the story seems to a standalone tale.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
W W FASSBINDER D?
|
|
|
LargeLeader
W-Y Advisor
Brig. General
 
Merits: 492
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 2,780
|
It's a standalone film, but it's still supposed to take place a while after the first film. According to RobRod, it doesn't mention Predator 2.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dude
Security
General
  
Merits: 924
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 8,800
London Vice
|
It's standalone like Predator 2.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Anto of the Sand
Guest
Space Jockey
A derelict post from a vanished civillisation
|
P2 'aint standalone.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Neltharion
W-Y Advisor
Lt. General
Merits: 442
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 5,598
Can this wait? I need to do some calibrations
|
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
beckmen
|
It's standalone like Predator 2.
In a way it is. No returning characters and whatnot. Not a sequel like The Empire Strikes Back is a sequel, you see. Or even the Alien sequels. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dude
Security
General
Merits: 924
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 8,800
London Vice
|
P2 'aint standalone.
The Predators script references P1 as much as P2 does. So it is standalone like Predator 2. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Anto of the Sand
Guest
Space Jockey
A derelict post from a vanished civillisation
|
That doesn't make sense. P2 isn't standalone because it mentions stuff from P1.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Thedus
|
Yes, it does make mention of events in Predator, but it doesn't rely on the first to validate it's presence. You could see P2 and never see Predator and it would still make sense. The story stands on its own feet. It's a sequel/installment in a saga, but it's also it's own standalone film. Example: I would not consider any of the Matrix sequels standalone films because they rely too heavily on the installment(s) before, but I consider The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly a standalone film - even tho it's a sequel in a series.
The key to a successful sequel (IMO) is that the film can act as a standalone and it doesn't rely on an audience's knowledge of what came before in order to make sense. you can have a successful sequel that relies on a previous installment, but a truly good sequel can be a standalone.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
deezelboy
|
...but I consider The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly a standalone film - even tho it's a sequel in a series. *Cough* Prequel! *Cough* |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
<![CDATA[<a href="http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/deezelboy/Flash/microDefenderv01.swf" target="_blank">http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/deezelboy/Flash/microDefenderv01.swf</a>]]>
|
|
|
|
|
Anto of the Sand
Guest
Space Jockey
A derelict post from a vanished civillisation
|
Those three films aren't connected.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
deezelboy
|
Bloody are!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
<![CDATA[<a href="http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/deezelboy/Flash/microDefenderv01.swf" target="_blank">http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/deezelboy/Flash/microDefenderv01.swf</a>]]>
|
|
|
Anto of the Sand
Guest
Space Jockey
A derelict post from a vanished civillisation
|
No sir they 'aint.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
deezelboy
|
Explain.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
<![CDATA[<a href="http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/deezelboy/Flash/microDefenderv01.swf" target="_blank">http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/deezelboy/Flash/microDefenderv01.swf</a>]]>
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 
|
|
|
 |
