• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Underworld: Evolution stills

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ooo, looks good! (...as does Kate Beckinsale...). I hope it turns out well, because I liked the first movie a lot. It wasn't without it's flaws, but it was still fun.
 

pxleyes

Banned
oooo, sequal mmm. I cant wait. I actually liked the first one a lot, but I am really happy to see they are going into the backstory more. That is what intrigued me the most out of the first one anyways.
 

border

Member
Wow, I can't believe that they went ahead with a sequel. The first one was pretty crappy, but I guess its low budget helped turn a decent profit for Sony.
 
No doubt, she is so hot.

I enjoyed the first movie to a degree. It offered some cool ideas, but didn't really follow through with them all. Still, I'll give this one a chance. Didn't the first one kind of tank at the box office though? Surprised there is a sequel.
 
Teh Hamburglar said:
I'm pretty sure the movie was pitched as a trilogy initially.

Even if it was pitched as a trilogy, if the first one tanked, they could still esily pull the plug on the next two. Why sink millions of dollars into two more films if they aren't going to make them some cash. Sequels generally make less money then their orginal.

Case in point, The Chronciles of Riddick was pitched as a trilogy as well, but after spending like $125 million on the first film, it's highly unlikely we'll see the the other two. Especially since it only made about $115 million worldwide. (Of course, after Vin made a shit load of cash in that Disney movie a few months back, someone will probably get the idea to move ahead with the next film anyway.)
 

border

Member
If they can keep making the movies for ~20 million each, I imagine that the entire trilogy will get made. Of course they'll always look like 20 million dollar movies, but I am glad that the wrtier/director guy is lucky enough to say his vision completely played out. I'll give this one a chance, at least.
 

pxleyes

Banned
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Even if it was pitched as a trilogy, if the first one tanked, they could still esily pull the plug on the next two. Why sink millions of dollars into two more films if they aren't going to make them some cash. Sequels generally make less money then their orginal.

Case in point, The Chronciles of Riddick was pitched as a trilogy as well, but after spending like $125 million on the first film, it's highly unlikely we'll see the the other two. Especially since it only made about $115 million worldwide. (Of course, after Vin made a shit load of cash in that Disney movie a few months back, someone will probably get the idea to move ahead with the next film anyway.)

With Riddick they changed over to one movie before they started shooting Chronicles. It was originally pitched as three, but with the change in title (and no sub title), it is pretty obvious they have no plans to do another one. Which is sad.
 
pxleyes said:
With Riddick they changed over to one movie before they started shooting Chronicles. It was originally pitched as three, but with the change in title (and no sub title), it is pretty obvious they have no plans to do another one. Which is sad.

Really? I never heard that, and it's obvious from seeing the film that they intended to have more. The ending left so many places for the next films to go. And all three scripts were suppose to be done.

I enjoyed Riddick, mostly because of Vin, but the enemies were just too generic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom