Sir, you can’t do that….

Posted: August 28, 2009 by REASON in You're Better Than That
Tags: , , ,

I’m not the biggest movie buff, in fact most movies leave me wanting my $11.50 back (NY Movies = Scrill Passion). But Something that really bothers me is Movie sequels that break the succession rule and try to act like they are the first movie of their kind. Two offenders of this that quickly come to mind are the Fast and the Furious and the Halloween series. This is the kind of nonsense we don’t like here at ATI, non-comical ignance is not baller to me.









Now don’t get me wrong I’m not trying to say that every movie has to be named 2,3, and so on to distinguish them in proper sequence. In fact some of my favorite movies like the Matrix and Lord of the Rings  have unique titles for each successive movie. Also I’m a fan of the Batmans which follow no particular order at all, but for the most part are decent flicks.

My issue with the aforementioned rule breakers is that they follow the said criteria and then Break off for no apparent reason, please see below:

  • The Fast and the Furious (2001 film)
  • 2 Fast 2 Furious (2003)
  • The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006)
  • Fast & Furious (2009)
  • 1. Halloween (1978)
    2. Halloween II (1981)
    3. Halloween III
    4. Halloween 4
    5. Halloween 5
    6. Halloween 6
    7. Halloween H20
    8. Resurrection
    10. Halloween II (2009)

    As you can see the makers of  Halloween felt the need to be excessively egregious with breaking this rule. This is riduculous,  Halloween II REALLY? It’s literally the 10th movie. They could have at least taken the Batman route and had differnt titles for each.

    Net net you just can’t be doing this. If you had a bunch of kids and named them all the same exact name you have to follow some form of convention. You can’t name the last one Jr. and the 2nd one the IV. LG, folks in the film industry you’re better than that.

    1. passion says:

      Fast & Furious does not act like its a new movie, it actually references 1, possibly references 2, and definitely shouts out 3 in the opening part.

      Halloween I agree with completely

    2. […] definitely enjoyed it.  Even Reason’s convicted a$$ didn’t think that it contained any movie treachery.  I don’t want to do a full movie review and spoil the movie for our readers who have yet to […]

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


    Connecting to %s