Would you like to have seen a sequel to some of your favs

Discussion of the actors, directors and film-makers who 'made it all happen'
Post Reply
stuart.uk
Posts: 1805
Joined: January 21st, 2008, 12:25 pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland

Would you like to have seen a sequel to some of your favs

Post by stuart.uk »

Having watched The Audrey Hepburn Story, there is a scene in The Belgium Congo where Audrey, researching her role was introduced to the real Sister Luke. I could be wrong but I think Sister Luke in A Nun's Story is a fictional character based on a real life person. I think a sequel here showing Audrey joining and fighting for the resistance, before returning to the Congo as an ordinary nurse.

I think a sequel to Educating Rita would be a good idea with Julie Walters as the middle-aged professor Susan teaching a young uneducated man literature.

I thought it would have been a great idea if Roger Moore once he gave up Bond, played Simon Templar in a feature film. I think he had the same idea, but it didn't happen. In the 1969 feature length Vendetta For The Saint after Simon brought Ian Hendry's Mafia Boss to justice, Hendry said 'One day Templar That's a promise'

Now Voyeger with Bette Davis as Charlotte Vale. Does she ever marry, Dr. Jackman perhaps.

In A Man Called Peter the film ends with the death of Richard Todd's U.S Senate's Chaplin The Reverand Peter Marshall leaving Jean Peters Catherine a widow. However, Catherine still had an eventful life, remarrying and becoming a well know writer, including the novel A Man Called Peter. It would have been good to see IMO Jean Peters reprising the role.

What about They Died With Their Boots On with Olivia De Havilland reprising her role of Libby Custer as she fights to preserve her husband's memory until her death in the early 1930s.
User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Post by mrsl »

I've really only seen one sequel that stood out on it's own with no need to reference the original and that is Bells on Their Toes, the sequel to Cheaper By the Dozen, and of course I'm talking about the original. Cheaper . . . was about the father, Frank Gilbreth and the 12 children, but since he died at the end of the first one, the sequel Bells . . . was about Mrs. Gilbreth and her struggle to compete in the same arena her husband had, even though she was the more educated one. Bells . . . also continued the stories of all the children, such as who they married, and what careers they chose. They were however, written by the oldest sister and brother which shows the difference between the Clifton Webb version and the Steve Martin one. One was true, but the other was just a farce and should not have been allowed to use the same name to my way of thinking.

There are lots of sequels made and many can also stand alone without help from the original, but unless a movie is a really big hit, I don't think anyone really cares what happens to the characters. A few years ago a film called Kate and Leopold was made concerning time travel, where he traveled forward to the 90's then returned and brought Kate back with him (Hugh Jackman and Meg Ryan). I would have liked to see how she fared in the 18th century but it was a fantasy so anything goes.

You are correct in assuming real people like the Gilbreths and Sister Luke would make for interesting sequels I think. BTW I'm sure Sister Luke was a real person, only her name was changed. So Audrey could very possibly have met her. I do believe that is the time when Audrey became interested in helping third world countries, and returned many times after that film was finished.

Anne
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
shak88
Posts: 7
Joined: August 11th, 2008, 3:24 am
Location: Los Angeles

Post by shak88 »

not exactly a sequel, but after watching rita hayworth and gene kelly in 'cover girl' on tcm tonight, i would have loved to have seen them re-teamed in another film, they worked so well together.
columbia studio boss harry cohn had purchased the film rights of 'pal joey' for the two of them to star in after the success of CG, but mgm studio boss louis b. mayer refused to loan kelly out again, what a crime!!
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I think Gene and Rita should have been teamed togather again. Pal Joey would have been a great teaming.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
traceyk
Posts: 294
Joined: May 25th, 2007, 11:59 am
Location: Ohio

Post by traceyk »

Right off the top of my head, I don't know which movies I'd like to see a sequel to, but I can name at least one I was appalled to see a sequel to, probably because the sequel was so bad: Gone With the Wind. I will admit to never having seen the movie--the book was enough. I do apologize if there are any fans of Scarlett out there, but what a travesty! The author gave Scarlett and Rhett a total personality transplant. Part of Scarlett's "charm" (though maybe charm is too strong a word?) was her headstrong, self-absorbed personality. Yes, she was willing to work the fields to avoid starvation and run the mill for Frank, but as soon as Rhett came along and swept her off to rich people land again, she never lifted another finger. I can't see her visiting her father's people nor going to Ireland. Or living with her mother's family in Savanah, even if she did finally find out why her mother married her father.
And Rhett lying to poor dying Mammy and allowing himself to be pushed into marriage to save some girl's reputation? No way. Even if he was more sensitive to the importance of reputation after his experiences with Bonnie, I can't see him allowing himself to get into such a situation in the first place.
Anyway, sorry about the rant. And I may have gotten a few plotpoints wrong--it's been a while since I read the book and I only read it once, then, to paraphrase Dorothy Parker, I did not toss this book aside lightly, I threw it with great force.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. "~~Wilde
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Post by charliechaplinfan »

Don't apologise to me, I hated the book too. Take two of the best loved characters of 20th century literature and make them into totally different people.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
User avatar
traceyk
Posts: 294
Joined: May 25th, 2007, 11:59 am
Location: Ohio

Post by traceyk »

Exactly, Chaplinfan. It's almost blasphemous. And especially sad, when you think what they might have done with it.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. "~~Wilde
Post Reply