Fallen Franchises

[TMC1982 0]

http://www.411mania.com/movies/columns/96085

 

Ten Deep 02.04.09: Fallen Franchises

Posted by Lucas Huddleston on 02.04.2009

 

All things fall from greatness...even some of the greatest film franchises in history. Come on in as 411's Lucas Huddleston notes the ones he feels fell the hardest.

 

Hello, and welcome to Ten Deep: Week 19. Last week, I missed my post, and this week I almost called it again, though I really didn't want to in either case. A few weeks back, I made mention of the fact that, due my grandmother's failing health and the running of here and there because of it, I was almost unable to finish that particular week's column. That was the case last week, and almost this week again, though now her passing seems to be inevitable. In fact, I'm posting this at the literal zero hour, because she was rushed to the hospital due to the reason that she was unable to breath. This is the grandma that is my neighbor, and though we've seen it coming for a few months now, this is a pretty difficult pill to swallow, however inevitable it may be. As such, don't be surprised if I miss another post here in the oncoming weeks.

 

Also, I won't be going over comments from two weeks ago, though I will say in regards to Former C.W.D.U. and Nick, I've been planning on doing a Westerns list for a while, ever since the Fantasy list. I probably won't make it a top 50, but probably a Top 25 or so.

 

One final note, there's only eight entrants on this list, due my not being to devote my usual amount of time to it because of this family emergency. I apologize for that. I had another list almost completed (remember, I said it was going to be on an underrated actor), but I was thinking about this one and worked on this one during the week. Perhaps I should have finished the other, but I'll do that next week.

 

FALLEN FRANCHISES

 

Of course, the stipulation here is that it must be a substantial media/film/television franchise that's fell from grace (at least somewhat fell from grace, in some cases). These listed here are more or less the ones that really stick out in my mind, and I'm sure I'm missing quite a few. The only franchises that I'm excluding here are Horror franchises, if only because it's pretty well the norm for a Horror franchise to lessen as it moves along. Oh, and before anyone asks, I don't consider the Star Wars franchise to have ever really faltered. And besides, I've talked about it enough to last me for awhile yet. Also, I'm not including the Highlander series for that same reason -- I've given my thoughts on that at length before.

 

The Robocop series

 

Oh, Robocop…what happened to you? However violent it may very well be, and however inappropriate it may be for a child to watch it, Robocop was one of my favorite films as I was growing up. Until recently, I had gone through a rather long stretch without watching the film (probably around ten years, which is by far the longest stretch I've went without watching it), though I did indeed watch the film again a couple of months ago. It was great, as all these scenes and lines that had been burned into my head when I was a child came rushing back to me, and it proved to be a rather stout nostalgic (and déjà vu filled) experience. However, it wasn't a case of me looking back on it all through the rose-colored glasses that seems to go hand-in-hand with nostalgia; Paul Verhoeven's Robocop, to this day, remains to be an excellent film. The atmosphere for the thing was truly palpable, and while the acting was great all across the board (who doesn't love to look back and see Red Foreman be a true psychopath?), Peter Weller's performance as the titular character remains to be a thing to behold, as even through his robotic movements, monotone voice, and placid facial expressions, he forces you to care about what happens to Robocop. And what's more, something that I didn't pick up on quite so well as a child, was the social satire that ran throughout the whole thing, whether it is via those great little televised news snippets that are shown, or through the oncoming apocalypse that is ultra-powerful businesses. All in all, looking back on it now, while it would be incredibly easy to dismiss Robocop as being somewhat of an absurd action film, it also proves to be far deeper thematically than what one would assume upon first glance. In a word: brilliant.

 

My re-living of the original film drove my curiosity, and so it was that shortly after I re-watched the first film, I dug out my old VHS copy of Robocop 2. My memories of that film were somewhat fond as well; I didn't like it near as much as I had the original, but it was more than enough to keep my attention throughout the entirety of the film. After I'd re-watched that film, it became clear to me just how far of a drop-off there exists between the first and second, not in terms of acting, or action, or anything of that nature. It just seemed as though it was fleecing those elements from the first one (quality acting, action, special effects), but declined in bringing with it the deeper stuff that had been a part of Robocop. While I feel as though that was a mistake on the part of the director for the second film (Irvin Kerschner), on the whole the film was actually quite good, and while not approaching the levels of greatness achieved by the first film, it was still definitely enjoyable. But then there's the third film (Robocop 3, of course), and in regards to that little movie during this re-living period of mine for the franchise a few months back, re-watching the third film never crossed my mind. My memories of that movie, even as a child, can be summed up like this: I've never watched it all the way through. And for a kid who loved him some Robocop, that should be enough to tell you what I thought of that movie, even then. I remember the guy playing Robocop couldn't hold a candle to what had come before (Weller was just too great in that role), and ninja robots. But the franchise makes this list due to the fact that ever since I re-watched the original, I've had this urge, a longing for a theatrical revisit to the Robocop mythos…and one done with the same amount of violence and intelligence that permeated the first film. I think we're long overdue.

 

The Aliens vs. Predator series

 

While I am indeed aware that the Aliens vs. Predator film series has thus far seen only two entrants into its existing catalog, the series earns a place here on my list by proxy of the fact that I've been somewhat led to believe that the AvP series is pretty much intended to be the extension of the two separate Aliens and Predator series'. And I, for one, couldn't be more dejected with said extension thus far, however sad it may very well be to say as much. For you see, I am a man. And, as a man, it's quite almost a pre-requisite to absolutely adore both the Alien films and the Predator movies. And I do. In my opinion, the only real part of both of the entrants to those two respective series' that fell short happened in Alien Resurrection, specifically the Ripley clone (I never really liked the super-powered Ripley, as the human kick-ass Ripley was much better), and the weird half-human/half-xenomorph. Honestly, I felt a little bit uncomfortable looking at that thing. So while the Alien hit a bit of snag with Resurrection, and the Predator series had been on an indefinite hiatus in over a decade, when AvP was announced, I held out high hopes, regardless if it was Paul ‘****ty' Anderson directing, and not Paul ‘Awesome' Anderson.

 

In fact, to say that I was awaiting the release of the film with bated breath would be a gross understatement. I can remember my own personal initial foray into the goldmine crossover that is Aliens vs. Predator came by way of comic books. I can remember quite vividly the feeling of detectable, and unquestionable, awesomeness that swept over my being as I stood in the Eldon Pharmacy and seen an issue of Aliens vs. Predator lazily reclined in the crook of the spinning comic-rack (I believe it was AvP: WAR #1, actually). Naturally, I bought it (or had my mom buy it, rather) the instance that I seen it, and once I got it home, I read through it time and again. So, of course, once I had the opportunity to see the awesome clash of two of the modern film world's greatest movie monsters, I couldn't help but feel let down. The first AvPwas okay, all things considering; however, the film lacked one thing that was necessary for my utmost enjoyment in regards to what I was watching: there simply wasn't enough aliens fighting the Predators. Whenever I saw the flashback during the movie where it showed a handful of Predators in a hardcore struggle against what looked to be an entire PLANET of aliens, I couldn't help but think that THAT was what I should've been watching. On the whole, though, I couldn't complain too much about what the first AvP film carried with it, as the Predators and the Aliens both looked great, and what confrontations there were between the two came off pretty good. However, whatever good will I may have forced upon myself in regards to the first film, the second movie, Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem, completely and utterly squashed said goodwill like a bug. It's a very rare thing when I claim that a film does little more than disgusts me, but here's one: AvP:Requiem disgusts me, and I truly feel that everything about it is horrible. While the AvP series on the whole can still probably be saved, my hope is, however much it may depress me, that the studios give up on the AvP stuff for now, and just give us some new Aliens and Predator films proper.

 

The Star Trek franchise

 

It may be hard to believe after looking at the science-fiction landscape of today in regards to film and television, but once upon a time, Star Trek was the undisputed king, the measuring stick, if you will. Now, I've never been what you would call a full-on Trekkie, but I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't a fan at all. Of course, being a child of the 1980's, I grew up on The Next Generation, and in my mind, that classic television series remains to be the high point of the franchise. All of the characters that served aboard that iteration of the Enterprise were great, interesting characters, with not a single one of them serving as a knock-off of any of the characters from the original series, and to this day I can think back fondly on things like Q, Locutus, and Lore. Then came along Deep Space Nine, which you never hear about, yet was supremely underrated. DS9 was a bit of a departure for the franchise, as it wasn't about ‘going where no man has gone before', since the series took place aboard a stationary space station. However, probably due to that fact, the show had a strong solidarity between the characters that were a part of the show, since most of them were there at all times. Onto Voyager, which was another great show, as it took the ‘where no man…' lingo to task, placing the crew of that vessel in a part of space that hadn't been explored yet (though since the show aired on UPN, and I didn't get that particular channel, my experiences with Voyager have been limited to catching whenever I could during its syndication of the past few years). Finally, there was Enterprise, another that I've only recently been able to catch on the Sci-Fi network on the odd nights that I haven't worked. There are some fans that seem to despise that particular show, but I myself don't see anything really all that offensive about it.

 

Of course, I didn't mention the Original Series…and that's because, as unfortunate as it may be, my experiences with that particular brand as come by way of the films, in large part. Out of the ten Trek films that have been released thus far, seven of them have dealt with the cast of the Original Series, and out of those, there's really only one film that I can honestly say wasn't all that good (that being the Shat' directed fifth installment…and possibly Generations, though that's more of a TNG driven film, though the Original Series' cast makes appearances). The rest are all quite solid, even the glacially paced first film, and as for the remaining films in the franchise that deal with the TNG cast…those are fine too, though even the best of those particular films (of which I think First Contact is) aren't quite as good as the second, third, fourth, and sixth films. However, after the bottom of the show Enterprise dropped out, for the first time in a long time, there wasn't any new Star Trek material being primed to debut either on film or television…though that's about to change, as J.J. Abrams prepares to unleash his upcoming ‘reboot' film this summer. Like a lot of Trek fans, though I've liked what I've seen from the trailers thus far, I still have my reservations about the film. I personally don't think the film will fail, though even if it does I doubt it'd be the death knell for the franchise as a whole. If it succeeds, though, it could lead to a major re-kindling of a once great and proud franchise…and that would be a good thing, in my opinion.

 

The Superman franchise

 

By now, the struggles surrounding the Man of Steel's ventures into television/film have well documented, and really not all that much of a well-kept secret. Of course, regardless of any disputes between producers and directors or the potential decision of a producer to give us a black-suited, giant spider fighting, flightless Supes, one of the main complaints that I'm sure we've all heard in regards to Superman in media is the notion that the character of Superman lacks a certain amount of interest…or, that is to say, he's just not interesting. Perhaps the number one reason for the lack of interest that people seem to give is the fact that since Superman is, well, SUPERMAN and he can't be hurt by conventional means, then any sense of conflict between Superman and his foes lacks a certain measure of excitement, since the end result of Superman winning is never really in doubt. I say this: that's a pretty narrow minded view on not only what can be enjoyed from Superman, but also a narrow minded view on the character of Superman itself. For a character that has been relevant for over seventy years and has gained an indelible degree of iconic status in the eyes of people from all over the world, you'd think that something as mundane as Superman being ‘boring' would have led to the character's downfall long, long ago…and surely he wouldn't be near as iconic as he remains to be (and I refuse to believe that the only reason Superman is what he is today is merely because he was the first superhero, as that's just too simplistic). What makes Superman a great character are mainly, one.) his supporting cast of characters, such as Lois Lane or Jimmy Olsen, characters that ground this near god-like character in his own humanity, and two.), the psychology of the character itself, such as that age-old question of whether Superman views himself as the displaced alien outsider Kal-El, the deity-like Superman, or Clark Kent, a good and compassionate human being. Superman isn't a ‘boring' character, and in fact is quite deep; whereas characters such as Batman and Spider-man (and many others) contain an internal conflict that is driven by vengeance, guilt, or retribution, Superman's drive, at least to me, has always been one of finding his place in the world, and being accepted as a part of said world – of which the three aspects of his personality (displaced alien…deity…good man in a not-so-good world) hamper that acceptance.

 

However, at this point in time, the main problem with Superman's transition to celluloid in respects to a future film really has nothing to do with the character, his supporting characters, or his Rogue's Gallery, nor does it have anything to do with relating an intriguing story. It has to do with the fact that seemingly general consensus dictates that the Superman film franchise is in dire need of a reboot…but then a reboot, one would assume, would essentially start the whole franchise over, all the way back to the beginning of things. And THAT'S the problem, because there's no need to go all the way back to the beginning. We already have the quintessential Superman origin film – Richard Donner's 1978 classic, Superman. You see, when the Batman franchise was rebooted in 2005, there was no such problem, as the origins of Batman hadn't been delved, only scraped across, in the four films that preceded Batman Begins. In that case, a true reboot worked, and was undeniably well-warranted for the sputtering franchise. But for Superman? There would honestly seem to be very little reason to revisit the origins of Superman, for though the original Superman may not be one-hundred percent perfect, it's about as perfect as it needs to be in order to convey who Superman is. In that respect, I laud Bryan Singer and company for recognizing the mark set by Donner's 1978 classic in their creation of 2006's Superman Returns, but while I may have been personally intrigued in their effort to craft an installment in a film continuity that hadn't been touched in nearly twenty years, I've often wondered if that is also one of the predominant reasons for the mixed-to-negative feelings in regards to Superman Returns. In a sense, apart from plot-holes and ‘the kid', that very well could be the film's greatest failing, as: A.) the film was a slave to the pre-existing continuity and storylines, and thus had to serve the master of those who were indeed familiar with the earlier movies and reel them into a world that hadn't been explored for a good long while; and B.) the film also had to cater to those that were watching Superman Returns that potentially may not have seen the original installments in the series, hence several aspects of Returns were shared with that of the original (such as the dialogue when Supes saves the plane, and what-not). Of course, that's just my opinion. And as for putting a little bit of darkness into the franchise, I say why not, as long as said ‘dark' aspects exist in the events surrounding the film, and not in the character of Superman himself, as he represents unending hope. In the end, though, it's a bit of a shame that with the current boom-trend in adapting comic book superheroes to film is lacking the presence of the greatest of them all, and as such, I for one hope that Warner Bros. takes their time and painstakingly plots a new Superman film out. I feel that it'd be worth the time and effort.

 

The Spider-Man series

 

To be honest with you, it's hard for me to really go so far as to claim that the Spider-Man franchise has fell completely, though I doubt that any would argue that it hasn't at least faltered a bit after the release of the third film. But still, I believe that it quite clearly has, even though it may pain me to say it. If anyone remembers, way back in Ten Deep: Week One, I let my love for the first two Spider-Man movies go all out, placing the first film at Number Three on my Comic Book Films list, and the second installment squarely at Number Two. If I was do that list again today…I'd probably do the exact same thing, and leave those two films where they're at. I truthfully and absolutely adore those two films. Spider-Man was the first live-action film based on a comic that left me feeling as though I had just truly watched a comic book come to life on the big screen as I walked out of the theater; Spider-Man 2 upped the ante and improved on the first film in every way conceivable, and it remains to be the one and only film that I've ever had the gumption to see on IMAX, as I made a special trip to Kansas City just to watch it after it had been released in that format. Good times, good memories, to be sure…and then came Spider-Man 3. Now, Spider-Man ranks in at my second favorite superhero (after Batman, naturally), and I obviously love the two previous movies (as well as the ‘90's cartoon series), so I'll be honest in my feelings about the third film: I personally refrain from condemning it too much from its transgressions, even going so far as to say that I like the film on the whole, but in truth, if the film had been anything BUT a Spider-Man film, as well as a continuation of one of my own personal favorite film series'…I would probably crap on the movie a lot more than I do.

 

So what was wrong with the film, exactly? Apart from the goofy emo turn that Peter Parker underwent after acquiring the symbiote (I actually felt a little bit embarrassed after watching the street-dancin' scene for the first time…), most people would consider the treatment of fan favorite Spidey villain Venom to be the most egregious offense that the movie committed, and I'd be in agreement with that assessment somewhat. However, I believe that the complete mishandling of Venom/Eddie Brock is only a construct of what I personally believe to be the most offensive aspect of the film. For you see, the first two films did something that I personally think was really fantastic, and something that I appreciate implicitly – they had a continuous build from movie to the next, and said build pertained to the slow burn of Harry Osborn's turn to villainy. In that sense, Spider-Man 3, for all intents and purposes, should've been Harry's movie. Sure, they could have kept the Sandman in the movie if they wanted, in order to push his conflicted character as well as have that big-time CGI element that Sandman brought with it…but the main focus of the movie should've been the conflict between Peter and Harry, former best friends. Instead, the lent Harry an amnesiac angle, for what I believe was the sole reason to sweep Harry to the side for a time so that the film could take the time to build up the character of Eddie Brock; other than for that reason, the amnesia angle meant absolutely nothing, lending nothing to the story of the film. And that, in my opinion, was the ultimate failure of Spider-Man 3. The Eddie Brock/Venom character would have been far better served to have been introduced and played with a little bit in this film in order to build to the next film, and nothing else. By doing that and then revisiting the character in subsequent films, they could've lent the character the same amount of weight that Harry carried with him. Instead, they chose to inject the character into the film's universe, attempted to get him over with audiences at the expense of the character that had been building up to this film since the first installment, and (presumably) run the gamut with the whole Brock/Venom/symbiote plotline in one film…and in one film that shared time with Sandman and the Harry-Goblin. Logic should have dictated that, if Raimi and the studio just HAD to do the whole symbiote thing, that they introduce the symbiote as it bonds with Peter, then perhaps Peter cripples or actually kills Harry (or Sandman) due to the symbiote, which in turn would lead to Peter getting rid of the symbiote as the film ends…with the symbiote falling onto Brock, of course. Oh well. You know, that whole thing didn't bother too much, when I thought that Spider-Man 3 was going to be the end of the franchise; however, since a fourth and potential fifth film have been announced, it just makes that lack of build to the Brock character THAT much more inexcusable. But, in the end, I believe that Spider-Man 3 will be looked back on as being little more than a slight bump in the road, as I think that Spider-Man 4 will see a return to form for the series.

 

The X-Men trilogy

 

I've said before that I'm not really all that big on any X-Men stuff nowadays, whether it be through films, cartoons, or comics (though I like Warren Ellis' run on Astonishing X-Men right now), and that's the truth…though I'm leaving out the one, big reason as to why I'm not enamored with Marvel's mutant-crew. The fact of the matter is this: back in my grade school days, somewhere between the grades of 4-8, I completely and utterly burned myself out on all things X-Men. I was getting everything that featured X-Men in it – videogames (namely the Super NES games, Spider-Man and the X-Men: Arcade's Revenge and X-Men: Mutant Apocalypse), t-shirts, trading cards, all of the Marvel comics that were produced with the letter ‘X' in the title during this period of time (and I mean that literally, as I still have gobs and gobs of X-Men, Uncanny X-Men, X-Factor, X-Force, Generation X, a bunch of What If… books featuring the X-Men…well, a whole lot of X-related comics)…you get the picture. So it was that by the time the year 2000 rolled around with the very first X-Men major motion picture, I was exhausted from the concept. To this day, the only X-Men film that I've seen in theaters was X-Men 2…and that was only the first ten minutes of the film, as shortly after Nightcrawler's attack on the White House, the movie screwed up. The theater refunded the price of admission to all the people in attendance of that particular film, with the promise that if they stuck around long enough, perhaps the theater folk could get the picture up and running again. Needless to say, I didn't stick around.

 

However, don't take that to mean that I disliked the films. I thought they were fine, and I bought the movies on DVD shortly after their release on home video. In regards to that, I thought that the first film was pretty good, and a pretty fun movie, all in all; X-Men 2 (I hate calling it X2) did what a sequel to a good movie is supposed to do, in that it improved upon the first film in almost every regard. In the end, I rather enjoyed myself while watching both films, and while they're not ranked among my very own personal favorites, I appreciate the quality of the two movies. The third X-Men film, The Last Stand? Eh, not so much, to which a multitude of reasons can be attributed to. So let's count them down, shall we (and if I miss any, feel free to chime in)? First off, there's just too much going on in the third film, as the film takes several plotlines from past comic story-arcs and just kind of tosses them all in the mix. The Phoenix Saga, the mutant cure angle…two fairly weighty and potentially emotional storylines that could have easily carried two separate films, if not more, by themselves alone. Secondly, whereas Bryan Singer, the director of the first two films, did a fairly admirable job in handling a large cast of characters, the large cast seemed to be almost too much for new director Brett Ratner to handle, and the fact that X-Men 3 went ahead and added dozens MORE characters didn't help his cause all that much. Some characters, such as Angel, just seemed to be in the film for the sake of being there, and others, like Beast, had potential to be intriguing before they became just another face in the crowd. Thirdly, the script seemed to have been enrolled in Jeph Loeb's school of writing. For those who don't know, Jeph Loeb is, of course, a writer, perhaps best known for his stint in comics and being the co-Executive Producer and writer for the show Heroes. Now, while Loeb has indeed pumped out some good work (of which Batman: The Long Halloween comes to mind, and was one of the Batman yarns that Christopher Nolan used as a template for his own Batman films), in more recent years he's drawn some heat for producing stories that devolve into little more than shocking moment after shocking moment, with little to no build between such moments and little apparent sense for such things to happen (for proof, check out the current Marvel series Ultimatum). That's essentially what drives the heavy plot in The Last Stand: shocks, which doesn't help the natural progression of the plot, as a lot of stuff happens with no rhyme or reason for it. A major character is killed off in the first ten minutes, and by the end of the film, it appears that easily ninety-percent of the characters that appeared in the film (and the series as a whole) have either been killed or de-powered…which would be absolute murder if the studio ever wanted to produce a proper X-Men 4 film, as that would require ret-cons of a Herculean effort in order to bring back the major characters with heavy relevance to the X-Men mythos that are now gone. In that sense, I suppose that this new X-Men: Origins line of prequel films is indeed the best way to go; in fact, it may be the ONLY way to continue with an X-Men film franchise.

 

The Crow series

 

I've related my feelings in regards to the original Crow film before, way back in Week One when I listed Comic Book Films. On that particular list, I placed The Crow in my Number Four spot, and, similar to what I said about the Spider-Man films, I'd do it again. Despite what others would say, I feel that The Crow is well-deserving of being ranked among the best of the best in regards to films adapted from comics. The film had a great, dark visual style, and an atmosphere that pulled in me in right from the opening scene until the end credits. Brandon Lee showcased that he could be more than just the son of a legend, and truly tapped into an (then) unforeseen talent that many weren't aware that he harbored within him…which made his unfortunate death at the hands of a malfunctioned prop just that much more of a shame. In my opinion, everything about the film was a masterpiece, and, perhaps with the exception of Dark City, stands as a high watermark in the career of director Alex Proyas that he may never be able to duplicate. Most importantly, I felt that, since everything was resolved in the film, there was absolutely no need for a sequel. However, those sequels did indeed come, and much like a lot of other great films that spawned a franchise, the original movie would be the only thing ‘great' about the series that was birthed from it.

 

I can remember seeing the original trailers for the second film, titled The Crow: City of Angels, and I can especially remember the levels of disinterest that I harbored towards the film, even without giving the movie a chance until years later…in fact, almost a decade later. And it was about what I thought it'd be – crap. Perhaps it was for the sole reason that I hold the original in such high regard as well as not really being in need of a sequel that I loathed City of Angels so much, as I've heard some people stand up for the film…but I refuse to like it. The third film, Salvation, I've seen as well, and I can honestly say that I remember NOTHING from it, except for the main character riding a motorcycle. That's it. And finally, just the other day in fact, I had the ‘pleasure' of watching the fourth film, Wicked Prayer, for the first time, starring Edward Furlong and Tara Reid…and that should be all I need to say about that, though I will say that Furlong looked totally unconvincing as a bad-ass undead guy. With all that being said, in my opinion, and for all intents and purposes, I believe that this franchise, much like that of the Highlander films, has reached a point of no return. This series has fallen to a point where I can't conceivably imagine a way for it to pull itself back up to the level of quality and vision that the original movie had, as it's been mishandled to the point where I personally don't even care anymore. And if you can get a person who was a rabid fan of the original to NOT give a crap about what he once loved, then you've set a new standard.

 

The Matrix trilogy

 

Amazingly, somehow, someway, I was completely able to avoid any and all of the hype and verbal accolades laid upon the original Matrix film when it was released in 1999, and I honestly got by without ever having seen it until sometime in mid-2001…nearly two years after the film's release unto the masses. One day, while I was in college and living in a house with some friends of mine, I just happened to walk into the living room where a handful of my friends were watching The Matrix. I truthfully had no idea what it was that I was watching, but I knew one thing for certain: it was amazingly awesome. Like a lot of people, I was drawn in by the special effects, but I found myself mostly enamored with the story that was crafted through the film, one where everything around us, friends, family, life itself, is all truly an illusion and nothing is what it seems. So it was that by the time the second film, Matrix Reloaded, rolled around and the hype machine was running at full throttle, I made sure that I was paying attention enough to learn of the film's theatrical release date, and I soon found myself sitting in the theater in attendance of the film's opening date. After I watched the second movie for the first time…I liked it, and I still do to this day, though I don't know if I can claim it as being a good sequel as I feel that it didn't surpass the quality set by the first film. But it was decent all the same, as the action sequences were once again mind-blowingly great, and the plot hit on some fairly intriguing elements as well (I still love the scene where Neo meets the Architect). However, whatever trepidations that I may have felt after watching Matrix Reloaded was quickly shunted away a month or two later, after the direct-to-DVD release of The Animatrix, a compilation of nine short films that deal with the universe and continuity set by the films. Almost of its own accord, The Animatrix was enough to really sate my interest in further learning about the universe surrounding the Matrix, as the short films really lent the continuity of the films a truly epic feel in terms of storytelling, particularly the two shorts that dealt with the Second Renaissance. By the time the third film, Matrix Revolutions was released, I was incredibly giddy to see it, mainly on the strength of the Animatrix compilation, and I was there on opening night yet again. And like a lot of other people who've seen the movie, I left feeling a little under-whelmed. Actually, I left feeling a LOT under-whelmed.

 

First off, allow me to address how I myself view The Matrix films. I do indeed understand and recognize a lot of the philosophical elements that are contained within the films. I've even read one review on the internet (though it escapes me where it was that I read it, or who wrote it), where the reviewer claimed that the transpirings during the Matrix series was so high-brow, so beyond normal intelligence levels, that those who didn't recognize the greatness of the issues raised within the movies were simply just not smart enough to enjoy it. However, I never, EVER bring it up when I talk about the films, for the sole reason that those philosophical elements hold very little interest for me personally. I'm more interested in good, original stories that can keep me enthralled all throughout a certain film, or even a certain franchise as a whole. When I initially watched the first film in the series, I can remember talking about the story with my friends, wondering about the many certain twists and turns in the plot that the subsequent films to follow would hold. And in my honest opinion, they held none whatsoever. Sure, there were a few revelations here and there, such as the Architect's big reveal at the end of the second film, but on the whole, what at first started off as a plot that would seemingly harbor a mind-bendingly complex and intricate plot was, in the end, as straightforward as could be – so that was a disappointment for me. As well, during Revolutions, there were several sub-plots that were raised that ultimately went nowhere. For example, at the beginning of the film, it's revealed that Neo can plug himself into the Matrix without actually being physically plugged in. That's great…too bad it doesn't really go anywhere or mean anything in the broad scheme of things, as he never does it again, nor is it really addressed. I mean, to me, that'd seem like a fairly big development in the power level of Neo, but it never happens again. One of the more intriguing characters introduced in the second film, The Merovingian, makes an appearance in the third film as well, though his brief role only feels as though it serves the purpose of having Trinity and company put on a super-stylized confrontation with the Merovingian's lackeys. None of the Zion stuff every really caught my attention, and though the attack on Zion in Revolutions looked exceedingly cool with well-done CGI visuals, ultimately I could've cared less about Zion. And as for the ending? I really can't recall a more anticlimactic end for any kind of big-time franchise such as this. The fight between Neo and Smith was by far the highlight of the film, but…after being enslaved for God-knows-how-long by the machines, they just have a truce? You can either remain in the Matrix and serve in the same capacity as you did before (i.e. human battery), or you can leave it and eke out an existence on a barren and toxic world? Sounds like the EXACT same situation that they spent three movies fighting.

 

Sometimes I feel like I'm a little too hard on the Matrix franchise, but in some ways, I feel that it's deserving of the hard feelings that it receives from people such as me…and for this reason. In my honest opinion, I think that the biggest failing of The Matrix trilogy is that it started out seeming to be so wonderfully different…but by the end of the trilogy, it had proven to be just like every other film trilogy that's ever been released. A pity.

 

The original Batman franchise from Tim Burton and later, Joel Schumacher needs to be on the list. So does the "Jaws" franchise.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

Star Trek has such a large core fan base that I don't think it really fits on that list. OK, so Enterprise was dropped after 4 seasons, but that didn't stop them funding to make another movie. If they were to make another TV series, you know it'll grab a high percentage of the TV share.

 

As for the movies, again, you know it'll get the hardcore fans going to watch it (and bitch about it no matter what) and they'll rarely get new fans in due to stigma or not knowing whats going on. So the 'reboot' will do good to freshen up the franchise, new look, it starts from the beginning, but will be familiar enough for the core fanbase to relate to (and feed their bitching).

 

I agree that Jaws needs to be on the list, as does Batman.

 

X-Men as a collective is probably over, but as a Franchise its fine. They have enough characters and backstories (and time frames) to delve into they'll be able to pump out a number of films - see Wolverine.

 

Spiderman while it has confounded those of us who have read the comics (or at the least seen the Cartoons) with its story arch in the third film, the average movie goer will enjoy and still go to see a Spiderman 4 without a second thought. So, by no means is that a Fallen Franchise.

 

Superman I agree with this. Superman Returns, even as a standalone film, was such a strange movie, that if it was the only Superman movie someone had seen or even heard about, its got a hard job to regain some of that crowd. A Son out of no where, 90 mins of build up to Superman lifting an island (that should have killed him) into space, and other annoying moments.

 

AvP its fallen due to our expectations, but from what its offered and continued to offer, its gave what it set out to give. A mindless action movie for the jocks and MTV lovers.