MovieChat Forums > Flatliners (2017) Discussion > MY thoughts on sequel or remake.

MY thoughts on sequel or remake.

posted 7 years ago by Starduster (268)
10 replies | jump to latest

FIRST
I am RARELY a fan of remakes. From what I understand that this is being billed as a sequel. From MY standpoint, I dont know exactly what it is. It fails to make a connection as to Sutherland's character being the same person as he was in the first film; so it doesn't play out a sequel.
Nevertheless, the movie stays fairly true to the themes of the first movie. The stories (personal experiences) of the characters are different but you can draw parallels to themes from the first movie.
I was not particularly impressed with the cast of this movie. Perhaps time will establish their future claims to fame. For now, I dont think they measure up to the standards of the original cast. Frankly I found the originals more "likable".
This being said, I give credit that the movie stays true to its roots. I dont see that it undermines or degrades the original.
For me there were times of chaos and confusion in the movie but looking back, the original had some of these same moments. By the time this movie "wrapped" I felt that the stories had played out well and resolved themselves.
The thoughts of the subject (killing oneself; then reviving) is a very scary thought. It is certainly controversial and unethical, but exploring the ideas of a hereafter is a compelling subject.
All in all, I thought it was a decent movie. Not really as good as the first one, but not horrible either. If you enjoyed the first movie, this one follows along the same lines.
If you didn't like the first one, you might as well skip this one. It doesn't offer more than the original and I dont find the actors as good as the originals.

[–] [email protected] (383) 7 years ago

It;s a sequel

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 7 years ago

Saw it today, and I didn't see anything that led me to believe it was a sequel. No connection at all to the previous story, other than a similar plot. So I'd say it's a remake instead of a sequel.

[–] [email protected] (383) 7 years ago

Kiefer Sutherland played the same character from the original albeit with a different name, so that makes it a sequel

[–] Starduster (268) 7 years ago

The original character is a medical student. the current one is a professor. He is 27 years older. As has already been pointed out, his name is different.
HOW does this establish any meaningful connection between the 2 characters?
I saw no other references or connections other than the obvious similarity of plot.
It needs more than a common actor (with different character name) to establish it as a SEQUEL.

[–] Barclays (960) 7 years ago

I can't believe Keifer Sutherland made a cameo.

[–] [email protected] (383) 7 years ago

same character, albeit with a different name

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 7 years ago

What makes him the same character? What does he do in this movie to make you believe he's the same character as the original movie?

Definition of 'sequel':

"b :the next installment (as of a speech or story); especially :a literary, cinematic, or televised work continuing the course of a story begun in a preceding one "

Tell me, exactly, how this movie continued the course of the story begun in the earlier version.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Starduster (268) 7 years ago

Actually my original intention was to give my thoughts on the current movie as compared to the original........... regardless of whether we call it a sequel or a remake.
I can accept it as a sequel as long as we assume that Kiefer is playing a different character. In MY estimation, it is NOT clear that he is the same person but has changed his name.
OTOH as a REMAKE it also does not establish a connection of the original characters, with the previous ones OR their individual experiences.
You can understand the confusion and controversy on both sides. I am going to lean toward the direction of a sequel. However it doesn't bring anything particularly NEW to the table, except new stories of peoples past transgressions and how these "skeletons in the closet" haunt these individuals after their "death" experience.
Again I will say that I DIDN'T dislike the movie, but I was not particularly fond of the actors. I like to feel some connection with characters in a movie and that I care about them. Outside of the fact that I dont particularly want human suffering, I didn't feel any strong feeling of connection with any of them.
Sequel or Remake, I have seen things that are FAR worse than this. It doesn't do any particular disservice to the original or its ideas.
As a final thought; if its a sequel, it would seem more defining if it were called Flatliners 2 or Flatliners the next chapter or something that sets it apart from the original. Otherwise it sounds like a remake.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

[deleted]