shrek 5?

A sequel to the Schwarzenegger movie?

I keep saying that satire is becoming obsolete.

In several years our movie theaters will be decked with posters that look like they came from The Simpsons.

Eeyup.Surprised me when I saw the commercial for it last week.

Is Arnold in it?

No,it has Larry instead as a different character then Arnie's and some guy named Santino Marella.From a summary,"A child's father and stepfather engage in an all-out battle to get her the toy of her dreams for Christmas.".

That sounds more like some kind of pseudo-remake than a sequel. So there's not even the sadistic pleasure of seeing Arnold degrade himself like a circus animal?

I swear, film executives who greenlight this kind of stuff, in their simplistic attempts to fit any kind of financial success into neat formulas, are so desperate to believe that any kind of connection with a pre-existing brand will automatically make their movie more profitable, and in their desperation they completely ignore the why in the the cases where that has proven true. Namely, that when a reboot/remake/sequel makes money, it is typically because there's a proven pre-existing fanbase that wants to see more, not because a brand name is a lucky charm that will make people watch your stuff even if they've never heard of it before.

At least they canned the Its A Wonderful Life sequel, thank God.

I...what?

There was gonna be a sequel that completely inverted the moral of the original

Sounds really dumb. Thank goodness that they didn't make it

edited 8th Dec '14 8:27:58 PM by teddy

What would be this inversion, exactly? And more importantly, why?

Everyone would be better off if Bailey, or his descendant? was never born. As for the latter, money , duh

Hey, Shrek 4 was about if Shrek were never born!

@125 That sounds like someone at The Onion decided to go, "Ah, fuck it, let's take the easy target today."

@127 The only difference between society now and 25 years ago is that now, you're aware of just how redundant satire can be. Thankfully, it's still not dead.

For a theoretical Shrek 5 - do people still do Spinoff Babies? Is that still a thing? Because I could so easily see them going there.

Executives, despite their portrayal in media, are people too. For the most part, they understand Sturgeon's Law and understand that it applies to their companies' works as well. 90% of what you do as a major production or distribution company is going to be crap of some degree, but the key is to make money on it. That's where all of the unnecessary tie-ins come in, because it's something to fill out the roster while you make the next blockbuster, and brand association helps you make a cheap movie and turn a tidy profit on it, moving onto the next one.

Now, of course, sometimes they honestly think a train wreck is going to be the next big thing, but that's not the case for most cheapquels. To tie into western movie franchises and keep this marginally on topic, the Aladdin sequels were made by the TV animation studio, so running significantly less cost (although in their case, most of the quality remained, so you got the best of both worlds)

Ugh. If people thought Shrek 3 was bad...

Executives, despite their portrayal in media, are people too.

Yeah, sure, in the sense evil people is people too. I have heard too many horror stories from creatives all across the entertainment world to be convinced otherwise. Sure, there'll be the occasional good apple, but Sturgeon's Law seems to apply to the executives themselves as well.

But I really don't want to discuss that belief beyond that point, because that way flamewars lie.

edited 9th Dec '14 6:04:34 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

I've liked every Shrek movie. I didn't like Puss In Boots, but that was the 3D version. I didn't want to see that one in the first place and it made me feel nauseous. I ended up wanting to leave halfway through, but I stayed because my sister wouldn't know where I went. I've been meaning to check it out at the library and form a definite opinion.

I thought Puss in Boots was better than Shrek 3 or 4. Not a great movie necessarily but I enjoyed watching it.

The franchise as a whole needs to be dead and buried though.

They could make a movie starring Donkey.

Called Jackass.

... i'll show myself out.

<3

That's supposed to be a heart..

I liked Shrek 3...

I thought Shrek 3 was okay. I probably might have liked it better if I was younger at the time. I still feel like it took itself too seriously.

I loved the first Shrek, found the second one almost perfect and one of the greatest movies ever made, was very disappointed by the third, and when I finally saw the fourth I hated it so much that it made the third one look good. So I wouldn't want to see Shrek 5.

What if Thom Yorke played the villain?