House of Eratosthenes

For the last couple of years my girlfriend and I have been going through all the rigors of school with my thirteen-year-old son, while his mother gets him for the summer & does the fun stuff with him. This upcoming year it’s getting switched around, so the other household can yell at him about P.E. clothes in the laundry & homework & grades & what-not and I’ll be geocaching with him and hiking out in the mountains. I’m really looking forward to this.

He and I have been coming up with this list, which has just been shared between our two noggins. Thought I’d finally jot it down. He’s coming back over next weekend, so this may be subject to some revision.

The list is a list of patterns that are taken on when films come out in installments. The film series take on one out of a narrow selection of quality curves, and there aren’t too many of these. That’s what the list tries to capture. It is a list, of curves, of film franchises.

See if this matches your perception.

Superman/Batman/Jaws:

The first installment makes history; the second one is almost as good. And then there’s a huge shake-up, lots of new faces, and when the third installment comes out the quality takes an enormous step down. This brings another shake-up, followed by a fourth installment which can only be described as toxic. The franchise is effectively killed.

Star Wars/Godfather:

The first installment is mind-blowing and the second one is even better. Someone gets the idea that all the money in the world will be free for the taking, if only the series can be made more kid-friendly. And so there’s a third installment that is supposed to appeal to a whole new generation. The messages are shallow, the characters are more doe-eyed and sympathetic, the dialogue is contrived. People buy the trilogy on disc but they only watch the first two.

Indiana Jones/Die Hard:

The first installment revolutionizes film-making but the second one is gawdawful. The third one is somewhere in between the two, kinda fun but stretches credibility with the audience. Everything is put on hold for a generation or so, and then a fourth installment comes out that’s great summer fun, but not very believable, and of course the central figure is kinda old.

Star Trek/Star Wars Prequels:

Something happened previously that brings a whole lot of breathless anticipation for the first episode. The producers take advantage of this pre-built audience and release a first installment that is a load of crap. Fans bubble forth with a fiery acidic rage, and purely out of necessity the writers come up with a stronger story arc that saves the day.

The Mummy/Poltergeist/Zorro/Cannonball Run/Creepshow/Darkman/Porky’s/Spiderman:

The first installment is decent enough but the second one gets a little bit silly and the third one is sillier. Somehow, people just feel it in the air that each successive installment is going to be worse than the one that came before. The higher and higher Roman numerals are just a way of thumbing one’s nose at the audience, and by the time it gets up to “IX” the subtitle is going to be “Look, We’re Just Wasting Your Time and Money Okay??”

(Insert Name of Video Game Here):

All the movies are made out of some kind of video game, and they all suck.

(Insert Name of Video Game Here):

All the movies are made out of some kind of video game, and they all suck.

Two words: Uwe Boll.

Why the hell they keep giving that creature the reins of video game to film projects is probably one of the unsolvable mysteries.
- KG | 07/15/2010 @ 20:14
Not so with porn. For example, ‘Older Women with Younger Girls III’ was the bomb and the prequel to ‘Driving and Drilling Ms. Daisy’ was excellent.

Seriously, Morgan, good to hear your going to have next summer with your boy. Makes me confident that another smart conservative (from Cali to boot) will be around when I’m getting long in the tooth.
- tim | 07/16/2010 @ 06:44
Wow, what a good oportunity to examine such movies, and spend lazy summer days passing along…
“THIS is what REALLY goes on when you blow stuff up.”
Considerations-
1. BIG sand pit.
2. BATF AND E
3. Contributing to the delinquency…
4. Proper eye protection
- CaptDMO | 07/16/2010 @ 16:09
Man, am I really behind on my Eratosthenes. I doubt I’ll have the time to catch completely up, but hey, I’m bach-in’ it for a week.

Got no explosives, but do have several guns. Hmmm. And I was just out on the deck with a pipe and whiskey.

Can’t argue with you on the movies … especially the Star Wars ones. Both sets. I know I watched the first prequel, I think I watched the second but I have no memory of it, and I just didn’t even bother with the third and I’m not even curious.

The Ewoks ruined the whole original trilogy for me. Think Johnny Quest boy with his dad’s gun and the Smurfs. Morgan, I know you know what I’m referring to 😉

The Mummy …. I can’t get past Rachel Weiz, so I really don’t care how bad the movie is. I just wanna see more of her. God created no more beautiful woman than she, and that’s sayin’ somethin’. Attack of the Killer Tomatoes starring Rachel Weisz, I’d be there all the way through. If only she’d played Jar Jar.

But in general, great observations … and I’m not even saying mine negate yours in any way.
- philmon | 07/16/2010 @ 19:32
I have to take exception to your characterization of “Star Trek/Star Wars Prequels.”

First off, I thought the newest Star Trek film was positively excellent. Everyone I’ve talked to thinks its excellent. It features an all-new cast playing the classic crew, but during the film, the plot takes a twist that veers it far away from the original storyline. Now, Star Trek can go in a completely different direction than it did back in the 60s/80s. Lots of people enjoyed the heck out of that movie who weren’t even Trekkies.

As for the Star Wars ‘prequel’ films, I seem to be the only person on Earth who enjoyed all three of them. Yes, things dragged for a certain period during the second movie…did we really need ALL THOSE lovey-dovey scenes between Anakin and Padme? When the film was released in 2002, Lucas (or someone) said that the movie was more aimed at women…and my first thought was, “Don’t women have ENOUGH freakin’ films already? They had to inject a bunch of estrogen into Star Wars? Has Lucas gone completely mad?”

And when the third installment came out in 2005 (in my opinion, the best of the three), I didn’t appreciate all the stupid, clumsy, ham-handed comparisons between Emperor Palpatine and George W Bush. Some of these comments were made by people pretty high-up in Lucasfilm Ltd, too…though to his credit, Lucas himself stopped short of that.

That said, I loved the prequel movies almost as much as the three “classic” films from 1977-1983. I mean, come on – you have to admit the pod-racing scene from Phantom Menace was awesome, as was the lightsaber battle between Darth Maul vs Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan. Yeah, Maul’s death was a bit cheesy…but they’d REALLY stepped up the pace of the fighting from the original movies, and the musical score during that scene blew my mind. And I liked the Geonosian battle arena scene in Attack of the Clones, and there was too many good scenes in Revenge of the Sith to mention.

If I’m the only Star Wars fan out there with these thoughts, so be it.
- cylarz | 07/16/2010 @ 21:14
It’s ok, cylarz. We won’t disown you.

I should point out though that you spent more time talking about what you didn’t like about the Star Wars Prequels than what you did. 😉

On top of that, regarding the pod race …. I couldn’t get over from a physics standpoint how impractical Anakin’s pod design was. I know, it was supposed to bring to mind a horse and chariot thing, and it did…. but …. from an efficiency and stability standpoint, I was just shaking my head.
- philmon | 07/17/2010 @ 07:46

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Movie SeriesThursday, July 15th, 2010

Movie Series
Thursday, July 15th, 2010