In response to
"The key difference is that Sin City was a good film liked by most. There has yet to be a good Expendables film."
by
David
|
I kind of don't know how much water this arguemnt holds. exp 1 was *terrible* but did well at the BO. if people thought it was not "good,"
Posted by
peggy ann m (aka amanda)
Aug 20 '14, 07:21
|
they would not have seen #2, which made more than did #1.
I can't get my head around what happened with #3, before you attack me. people were like "well, the first one sucked so I'll give the franchise exactly one more chance"? or was #2 that much worse than #1 (I don't know because the first one almost made me throw up so I haven't watched #2). is it the R rating vs PG13 rating thing? has the audience died off? I really don't think the torrent thing mattered *that* much.
in any case, I agree that sin city 1 was a "good" movie, but i didn't really enjoy it and don't really see how a sequel is like... necessary? maybe? maybe it makes $20 mill.
|
Responses:
|