Sunday, October 26, 2014

Timing of Sequels and the Birdemic (2010, 2013) Movies



It has been a full 100 weeks since I first started my journey through the world of bad movies for these blog posts.  I began with Starcrash, one of the most well-known rip-offs of Star Wars, and a movie that lives on as an example of what not to do when making a movie.  It seems only fitting that for the 100th week of the Sunday “Bad” Movies, I dip into similar territory by watching another movie (two in this case) that rips off something classic and shows many of the mistakes that can be made while making movies.

Birdemic came out of nowhere in 2010 and rose to fame as one of the worst movies ever made.  After being rejected by the Sundance Film Festival, director James Nguyen self-promoted his movie into a distribution deal.  The release did a lot of things for the movie.  It became popular in bad movie circles, and the shoddy effects and poor acting crossed into the mainstream.  People were sharing clips of the birds doing Kamikaze attacks and exploding on impact.  I know that prior to seeing the movie, I had seen a clip of the two minute applause scene.  The movie was quickly invading the popular culture of North America.  Possibly other places too.

Soon after the popularity of Birdemic came to fruition, James Nguyen announced that he would be making a sequel to the bad movie classic.  Birdemic 2: The Resurrection came out in 2013.  It brought back many of the actors from the first movie, and presented the same terrible bird effects that audiences had seen and loved before.  It was the right sequel for the series.  Yet, it didn’t catch on in the same way as the previous effort.  Nobody talked about the follow-up the way they had spoken about the original.

I’ve seen many debates over the past year or two or three or however long it has been about the right time for a sequel to come to fruition.  I’ve seen people say that a sequel made ten years after the prior movie is too long to wait between sequels.  I’ve seen people say that a sequel was made too close to the movie before and that the writers needed more time to think out a good script.  What decides how people feel about a movie’s sequel and how does any of this relate to the Birdemic movies?  That’s what I’m about to write.

In order for me to fully realize my thoughts about this topic, I must first take a look at two different sequels from 2014 that came out years after their predecessor.  The first is the critically praised Before Midnight.  Before Midnight stars Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy.  It is the second sequel in the franchise following 1995’s Before Sunrise and 2004’s Before Sunset.  As you can see, it had been ten years between Sunset and Midnight.  The things that people appreciated about the third installment was that the story built upon the characters and their lives.  The movies have always been a look at the characters and that moment in their lives.  The third movie was no different and the viewers ate it up.  They appreciated seeing the characters nearly twenty years after they first met and witnessing how their lives had changed.

Another 2014 sequel didn’t fare quite as well as Before Midnight.  One of the biggest commercial and critical flops of 2014 was Sin City: A Dame to Kill For.  It was a sequel to the successful Sin City, a movie released in 2005.  It was a sequel nine years in the making.  It also had a lot of changes that were made in the nine years.  Most of this was on a casting level.  Many of the roles were recast, which caused confusion in the continuity of the franchise for casual viewers.  But these changes weren’t the only thing that caused the movie to be considered a failure.  In 2005, when the first movie in the franchise was released, it brought a new style into cinema.  It looked and felt more like a comic book than any of the other comics that had been adapted to film.  No, it didn’t have speech bubbles and panels, but the aesthetic felt much more comic-bookish than what people were used to with the X-Men, Spider-Man, Batman, and Superman movies.  It was new.  It was refreshing.  Nine years later, the style failed to have that same bang that it had when it was first shown to audiences.  It had been used in many movies since, and lost its luster.  And that’s why it was a bad idea to wait as long as they did for a sequel.  All of the fun in the style of the Sin City movies had been drained through other movies aping it.

Now to take a look at the sequels made very quickly after the movie that came before it.  On the successful side you have Sharknado, which was released in 2013 on SyFy, and Sharknado 2: The Second One, which was released on SyFy in 2014.  There’s only one year in between the movies.  The second movie was made between when the first one came out and when the second one came out.  It was made due to the cultural saturation of Sharknado.  When the first Sharknado came out, the internet went wild.  It was a movie about a tornado (actually three tornadoes) filled with sharks.  It had Tara Reid and one of the guys from Beverly Hills 90210.  The internet ate it up.  It got a lot of traction on Twitter.  The sequel capitalized on this fame and did even better.  It got high ratings for SyFy, and was all over Twitter.  It was a case of making the sequel quick enough to still be a part of the cultural zeitgeist.  And it worked.

Compare this to the Saw movies.  Particularly to Saw V.  Every movie in the Saw franchise come out a year after the one previous to it.  Aside from the first movie, of course, since there was no Saw movie before that one.  For the first two or three movies in the franchise, there were interesting ideas.  The plot moved forward.  Things were not at a standstill.  Things began to change after that as the movies all tried to tie into one another.  This meant that eventually, they wouldn’t be able to move the story forward.  It culminated in Saw V, where the entire story of the movie was negated in the final moments.  Everything that happened was meaningless because of the conclusion.  It was the series’ version of the “everything was just a dream” cop out.  And it was a result of the need to tie everything together.  The events had to happen within the time frame of the other movies with very little outside of it.  And it showed that sometimes you need a little bit more time to write when the plot is so complicated and intricate.

How does all of this relate to Birdemic?  You’re probably asking that right now.  You’ve probably been asking that almost this entire time.  Why did I go through all of these long and short times between sequels?  Birdemic falls in between.  It wasn’t as quick as a year between films, but it wasn’t as long as a decade either.  It was three years between movies.  Let me explain.

I said nearer the beginning of this post that the second Birdemic didn’t have the same success as the first one.  There aren’t as many people talking about Birdemic 2: The Resurrection.  I think the reason is pretty clear and it comes down to what I wrote about the Sharknado movies.  Timing was everything.  Birdemic needed to capitalize on the popularity that it had garnered around 2011.  There should have been a sequel in the works already.  But there wasn’t.  The sequel got produced after the wave of popularity for the movie was already fading away.  This isn’t the only factor.  The distance between the movies isn’t the only factor for the less popular sequel.  People believed that the filmmaker might set out to make a bad movie instead of trying to make something good and failing.  They thought that the mindset of the people involved in the movie would have changed, thus taking away from how enjoyable the original was.  Whereas Sharknado was intentionally insane and bad, Birdemic was not.  To have it be intentional in the sequel would take away from the magic of the experience.

Sequels are a tricky thing.  Having them too far apart can cause the audience to forget about the predecessor, or it can allow competition to come into the business and eat away at an audience.  Having a long time between sequels can also allow for better writing or more growth in characters as they age and become wiser.  Having sequels too close together can cause fatigue and put a strain on the people making the movies.  But they can also give the audiences more of what they want when they want it.  The timing is crucial to how well it is seen in the public mind.  Is it too long of a distance?  Is it too short of a distance?  Is the distance between sequels just right?  It all depends on the movie.  That, and the people who watch it.
It’s the 100th week, so you know there are going to be a bunch of notes:

  • There are two more posts this week.  One post is a retrospective on 100 weeks doing the Sunday “Bad” Movies.  There is also a post that was created with the help of readers like you.  It’s about bad movies that you like.  I want to do some more reader participant posts in the future.  Maybe once a month.  We’ll see.
  • A poll is now up on the blog.  It contains every movie from week 51 until now, excluding The Oogieloves in the Big Balloon Adventure.  Basically, you must choose one of those movies.  I will rewatch whatever movie gets the most votes for the two year anniversary.  Vote away.  Any of the movies are eligible.
  • Birdemic was suggested for the Sunday “Bad” Movies by @ER_NotR.
  • Ten actors are featured in both Birdemic films.  These actors are Alan Bagh, Rick Camp, Damien Carter, Patsy van Ettinger, Stephen Gustavson, Steve McMoy, Whitney Moore, Colton Osborne, Eric Swartz, and Danny Webber.
  • James Nguyen directed both Birdemic and Birdemic 2: The Resurrection.
  • At the beginning of the post, I mentioned Starcrash.
  • In the post, I mentioned Sharknado.  I haven’t featured Sharknado yet, but I wrote about it a little bit in the post for Big Ass Spider!
  • I wrote about animal attack movies when I watched Two-Headed Shark Attack.
  • Do you have anything to say about the length of time between sequels?  Does it matter to you?  Is there a right amount of time and a wrong amount of time?  Have you seen Birdemic or the sequel?  What do you think about the timing between the two?  What do you think about the movies?  You can answer these questions or share any other thoughts regarding this post in the comments.
  • If you have any suggestions for the Sunday “Bad” Movies, you can leave them in the comments, or message me on Twitter.
  • I have recently made an email account for the Sunday “Bad” Movies.  You can email me at sundaybadmovies@gmail.com.

No comments:

Post a Comment