best blockbuster multi-movie franchise of the 2000's

LOTR, bourne, batman in that approximate order. the hellboy flicks are good, occasionally great. the oceans movies aren't bad, and 28 days/weeks later are both pretty dope. the more i think about the crank movies, the more i kinda hate them. the transporter movies are better, but both of those franchises sometimes make me think statham is wasting his talent.

Transporter 3 is one of the worst movies I have ever seen, which is super upsetting given how much I love 1 and 2

I am scared of the newest Resident Evil movie because others who have seen it have said similar things about it as T3

The Identity of the Traveling Pants
The Ultimatum of the Traveling Pants
The Supremacy of the Traveling Pants

had a momentary urge to protest for Ali G Indahouse/Borat/Bruno but then I remembered how awful the first and last films were.

There seems to be a lot of stuff on the listwhere the first film is OK-ish (sometimes barely), with follow-ups declining in quality from a not-that-great start. I'm kind of tempted to vote for "shrek" b/c the second one, for all it was much worse than the first, still had plenty good laffs in it, and the cat and the donkey were great. Probably vote for LoTR though, although I agree w/onimo that the extended DVDs are draggy. I might be the only person here to have seen "Princess Diaries 2", I started a thread about it somewhere, it was atrocious, saccharine/twee overload, but on the list is a worse film still, "Tomb Raider 2"

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Mark Harris @MarkHarrisNYC ·
Number of 2014's ten highest-grossing movies that are not remakes, sequels, or adaptations of material for children: 0

Mark Harris @MarkHarrisNYC ·
To those who are saying "What else is new?", through 2000, half of each year's top 10 movies were often originals aimed at adults.

Yeah, it's become pretty dire. The best film-news of this year might be the complete failure of Amazing Spider-Man 2, and the subsequent scrambling of Sony to save the franchise. A few more like that, and studios might be forced to (slightly) re-prioritize.

The Identity of the Traveling Pants
The Ultimatum of the Traveling Pants
The Supremacy of the Traveling Pants

― would like a calmer set (Eazy)

nice

The best film-news of this year might be the complete failure of Amazing Spider-Man 2

um

amazing spider-man 2 domestic gross - $202,084,843, worldwide gross - $706,342,322. sixth highest for the year domestic, fifth worldwide.

no doubt a 'disappointment'

It's a disappointment in that a lot of super-sequels have done better than the first installment, and this forced then to admit they really made spider-man 5 rather than The Dark Spider. But yeah nobody's going broke.

also, disappointed morbz didn't acknowledges Harris' next tweet, an RT of this: http://anthonyisright.tumblr.com/post/92930065294/original-movies-aimed-at-adults-that-made-the-years

o no doubt but not a failure. i'm not horrified by this weird recent sudden awareness that comic book and ya movies make money if only cuz if you look back twenty, thirty years at the 'movies for grownups' that were in the top ten highest grossing movies of the year it's stuff like tom clancy adaptations or police academy. even if you go back and look at highest grossing by year most of the #1s that are 'for grownups' are movies like ghost or they're movies for adolescents in sheeps clothing. it looks different pre-jaws but even then you still have disney dominating or yr king kongs etc. of the 'adult' movies left over it's by and large religious spectacle or adaptation of historical romance. i will say though if you haven't looked at the highest grossing films list in a while it might surprise you.

anyone who wishes there were more "original movies for adults" in the box office top 10 better go see lucy and make your voice heard!

top box office hits of 1981:

Raiders of the Lost Ark
Superman II
On Golden Pound (including '82 earnings)
Arthur
Stripes
The Cannonball Run
Chariots of Fire
For Your Eyes Only
The Four Seasons
Time Bandits

morbs longing for twenty years ago when an original movie for adults like pulp fiction could finish in the year end top ten grossers, 'why doesn't hollywood make more pulp fictions?'

man i forgot how much money that porn parody of on golden pond made, whatever happened to henry fondla

top box office hits of 1982:

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
Tootsie (including '83 earnings)
An Office and a Gentleman
Rocky III
Porky's
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
48 Hrs
Poltergeist
The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas
Annie

wonder what the gentleman did in that office

ASM2 was lowest grossing spider-man ever, and was basically meant to kickoff a whole universe a la marvel. On that acount, it failed abysmally, and ASM3 has been delayed two years.

so in the early eighties we had sequels, kids movies, SNL cast branching out, and token geezer support for OGP and The Four Seasons. America.

except they're still moving forward with the universe, with sinister six coming out before asm3

honestly not THAT much of an abyss

lol asm3 has been delayed two years so they can rush a different spidermanless spiderman movie out first.

When do we get the Turn Off The Dark movie?

making a marvel-style universe out of one hero and a bunch of villains was a pipe-dream, and that they've had to adjust it slightly in the face of merely making $$$ instead of $$$$ isn't exactly heaven's gate

lol frederik do you know what the highest grossing spiderman movie of all time is?

https://38.media.tumblr.com/4ac309deec1231cc9d8609fccebed05b/tumblr_n81z62oCK21sxzxtfo1_250.gif

i'm all for taking super-schaedenfreude where you can get it, but lets not pretend someone jumped out of the daily bugle window

lets wait and see if america runs out to see paul giamatti and jamie foxx go to white castle or whatever they got planned for the six

Spider-man 3 followed up on what is generally considered the best film in the franchise, while ASM2 followed up on a kinda indifferently received reboot with another indifferently received film. And the original plan was 2016: ASM3, 2017: Sinister Six, 2018: ASM 4. Now it's 2016: Sinister Six, 2018 ASM 4. It's a failure. And it suggests that the audience might soon have gotten enough of by-the-numbers superhero films, no matter the name-recognition of the hero. But stuff like Guardins of the Galaxy seems poised to make a killing.

I'm guessing the gif is from Spider-man 3, btw. Haven't seen it. My first guess was some old Jarvis Cocker video.

Are you confusing "indifferently received" with box office?

And the franchise-wish for SM might have been a pipe-dream, but was it really more wishful thinking than what the other studios are planning?

btw i liked Pulp Fiction

also On Golden Pond > Chris Nolan films

also fuck this

i mean, get your semantic kicks where you can, just realize most producers would kill to have a "failure" that makes 700m globally off a 200m budget

and yes, fred, it was more wishful thinking because there is ONE HERO where DC and Marvel and Fox have tons

i was going to ask if anyone knows anyone - adult, kid, purple, whatever - who actually verbally likes those new spiderman movies. i saw the 'first' one, it was on tv and i thought 'well let's see what this piece of shit is like' (did the same w/ man of steel the other night; man of steel is probably worse but it didn't feel nearly as pointless or rudimentary), maybe i'll catch fifteen minutes of the second the same way someday. anyhow i was going to ask until i remembered that in this camp i was volunteering w/ last week alot of the kids were doing spiderman hands and i thought initially 'o spiderman is eternal i guess', i had completely forgotten the new movies, but it occurs to me they were maybe just imitating andrew garfield's spiderman, he is spiderman now. i don't know for sure though, it's not like any of them were talking about gwen stacy dying in the new movie or whatever. it could be a thing though like how kids today think of little mermaid as a trilogy or maybe more to the point something similar to doctor who. anyhow i don't know anyone who actually likes those spiderman movies but maybe they exist? does anyone know anyone >10 who likes them?

a lot of people liked the emma stone/andrew garfield pairing, which of course was doomed from the start (womp womp). but yeah this drew goddard script for sinister six is gonna have to be a real mind-blower because nobody gives a fuck about any of the villains they've got so far

always thought that magneto aside that by and large dc had a real advantage when it came to villains the larger public might know/care about. the actual movies are changing that some - kids go loco for loki puffs - but there's still a deficit even if you just make it marvel vs batman. i was a dc kid growing up (still am at heart) so perspective might be skewed though.

May 2016: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice
July 2016: Shazam
Xmas 2016: Sandman
May 2017: Justice League
July 2017: Wonder Woman
Xmas 2017: Flash and Green Lantern Team-Up
May 2018: Man of Steel 2

That's seven films in three years. Though, of course, it might be wrong.

Or they might have giving up on it after seeing the abysmal failure of ASM2!!!!!

i also think dc is smoking crack but i count seven different heroes there not counting cyborg and aquaman

there's "hey lets pretend america cares about our superhero universe" and then there's "lets pretend we have a superhero universe"

I simply don't think that is a valid point. DC could have released films from the Nolan-Bat-verse every year if they'd been more cynical. The amount of heroes does not a franchise make. 'Good films' does. Urgh, can't belive I wrote that. But, y'know, films that people actually like, as opposed to tolerate because they are there. If ASM and ASM2 had been on the level of Iron Man 1 and 3, then Sony's plan would have worked.

croup you have to admit that characters like superman and wonder woman don't have nearly as high a profile and the proven ability to capture the public's interest that a character like whoever paul giamatti is playing again does

yeah whether you have multiple heroes to off-shoot off a team franchise or just villains and an "anti-hero" dressed identically to your one hero is totally irrelevant, it's just about whether movies are "good"

Yup. As stated: 'DC could have released films from the Nolan-Bat-verse every year if they'd been more cynical.'

But I guess the amount of films per year, and the proven box-office of the originating franchise over more than a decade is totally irrelevant, it's just about the amount of heroes.

wonder why they didn't, then?

oh right, because they had more heroes and had no need to experiment with a fucking Bane movie

You're right, their focus on Green Lantern was a real stroke of genius.

fred do you work for sony

wtf? my point is they had a valid idea, and screwed it up through execution. how on earth would that make you think i work for sony?