CHUD.com Community › Forums › CREATURE CORNER › Creature Corner Main › Ginger Snaps Sequels
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ginger Snaps Sequels

post #1 of 23
12/7/02 at 2:47am
Thread Starter 
I just KNOW they're gonna fuck these up, and the last creature corner update ain't helping....

Let's see, none of the creative influences from the first, BOTH actresses in the film (huh?) the same "wry sense of humor" (sounds much more like a threat to me, Mr. Butane)...and do we really need two sequels shot back to back?

It would be great if we could get a great horror movie once in a while not tainted by inferior sequels....but no one seems to know how to make them...especially since it's usually just about how much bank the first one did.

Let's just hope for the best for these and all upcoming sequels (Final Destination 2, Jeepers Creepers 2, etc.)
Reply
post #2 of 23
12/7/02 at 2:55am
The Ginger Snaps sequels and Cursed all sound pretty crappy to me.

I was holding out some hope for Cursed but the character descriptions in that article sound awful. When the kids turn into werewolves Rick Baker will probably just give them goatees.
Reply
post #3 of 23
12/7/02 at 3:09am
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! WHY GOD WHY?!?!?!? Ginger Snaps is my favorite movie ever! Why would they want to destroy something that is simple and pure by adding a sequel (or 2)! The story in the original was very complete the way it was, the story had a big beginning and a big finish and to drag the idea on and suck the life out of it would be cruel and unusual punishment!

(SPOILER WARNING!)

How the hell are they going to bring back Ginger? Is this going to be like one of those spy movies where the guy is in a car and it explodes and they end with a cliff hanger but then in the next episode it shows it ending differently? Well, is it?!?

(END SPOILERS)

I dont want to judge too harshly when we havent heard much about this yet, I suppose it could end up being a great new werewolf flick that has all the freshness and genius of the first with the same wit and grace. It could have a totally plausable storyline that does nothing to destroy the first. Hell, I could sprout wings and a tail when I wake up tomorrow morning...
Reply
post #4 of 23
12/7/02 at 3:15am
Thought this might shed some light...

Quote:
At first Fawcett was reluctant to become involved in the sequels because of his feature film and TV commitments, but Segal reports Fawcett "is heavily involved in the current conceptual stage."

Fawcett will turn the directing chores over to Brett Sullivan, who edited Ginger Snaps, and to Grant Harvey, who was his second unit director.

Segal says the two sequels will be "scarier than the original, much darker and much more action-packed. There will be a lot more special effects with the werewolves."
<a href="http://www.slam.ca/JamMoviesArtistsF/fawcett_john.html" target="_blank">http://www.slam.ca/JamMoviesArtistsF/fawcett_john.html</a>
Reply
post #5 of 23
12/7/02 at 3:19am
Quote:
Thats 'Ms.' Werewolf Gurl to you:
I dont want to judge too harshly when we havent heard much about this yet, I suppose it could end up being a great new werewolf flick that has all the freshness and genius of the first with the same wit and grace. It could have a totally plausable storyline that does nothing to destroy the first. Hell, I could sprout wings and a tail when I wake up tomorrow morning...
Three things that were in the original Ginger Snaps movie that will be missing in the first sequel:

1. The writer
2. The director
3. The "originality" of the story. The two sister's coming of age story is completed. There is nothing to add.

This films sound like a train wreck (if all the info is correct), which is a shame, Ginger Snaps was a very good flick.

Now what they do with the 3rd GS film (the prequel) is anyone's guess. That plot could be totally unrelated to the original all together.
Reply
post #6 of 23
12/7/02 at 3:23am
Quote:
Thats 'Ms.' Werewolf Gurl to you:
... but Segal reports Fawcett "is heavily involved in the current conceptual stage."

Fawcett will turn the directing chores over to Brett Sullivan, who edited Ginger Snaps, and to Grant Harvey, who was his second unit director.
</strong>

Ok. Strike that stuff I just said about the director's involvement.

Maybe there is hope, but I am sceptical.
Reply
post #7 of 23
12/7/02 at 12:52pm
Quote:
Thats 'Ms.' Werewolf Gurl to you:
Segal says the two sequels will be "scarier than the original
yeah, i'm already scared. and not in the good tingly way either.
Reply
post #8 of 23
12/7/02 at 1:24pm
I don't know I tihnk im going to give it a chance. I think they should just do ONE sequal....see how that goes then write another.....no need to put out two shitty sequals. But who knows.
Reply
post #9 of 23
12/7/02 at 1:52pm
Not wanting to start a new post, I'll just ad my little rant about Cursed here, of course if you all don't mind.

Reading the article Johnny posted about Cursed reminded me of another werewolf film, An American Werewolf in Paris. I don't know if the two will be anything alike, but if that article is any hint of what is to come, then you might as well cross this film off your calendar next year. Maybe it's just me, but if I was making a werewolf movie I'd be thinking about the design of the werewolf first rather then how sensitive a character is, also this is my own assumption but I think it's safe to say either Jimmy will end up with the girl or he'll turn into a werewolf and live a lonely life, or of course the opposite could happen she'll turn, but then again this could be to predicable, but what do you expect.
Reply
post #10 of 23
12/7/02 at 2:45pm
You know what creeps me out about 'Cursed'? How long is Kevin Williamson going to continue to write about the youth of today, 16 year olds in love and all that? The man did his duty, wrote some good and some shitty movies, I think he needs to try and broaden his horizons, maybe a werewolf movie with adults? Or is he not in touch with his adult side enough yet?

Just keep repeating two words..."Rick" "Baker"....
Reply
post #11 of 23
12/7/02 at 4:41pm
Well...I am not sure on how they are gonna work with the direct sequel with Katherine. It shall be interesting to see how they shall pull this outta their asses.

The 3rd movie though...thats intriguing me. I always like my Werewolf movies in the 1800's.
Reply
post #12 of 23
12/7/02 at 5:02pm
Quote:
Farmer Vincent's Fritters:
Quote:
Thats 'Ms.' Werewolf Gurl to you:
I dont want to judge too harshly when we havent heard much about this yet, I suppose it could end up being a great new werewolf flick that has all the freshness and genius of the first with the same wit and grace. It could have a totally plausable storyline that does nothing to destroy the first. Hell, I could sprout wings and a tail when I wake up tomorrow morning...
Three things that were in the original Ginger Snaps movie that will be missing in the first sequel:

1. The writer
2. The director
3. The "originality" of the story. The two sister's coming of age story is completed. There is nothing to add.

This films sound like a train wreck (if all the info is correct), which is a shame, Ginger Snaps was a very good flick.

Now what they do with the 3rd GS film (the prequel) is anyone's guess. That plot could be totally unrelated to the original all together.
Its' probably gonna end up being like the exorcist films. Good 1st movie, bad 2nd movie, good 3rd movie.

PEACE OUT!
Reply
post #13 of 23
12/7/02 at 5:04pm
Quote:
Johnny Butane:
You know what creeps me out about 'Cursed'? How long is Kevin Williamson going to continue to write about the youth of today, 16 year olds in love and all that? The man did his duty, wrote some good and some shitty movies, I think he needs to try and broaden his horizons, maybe a werewolf movie with adults? Or is he not in touch with his adult side enough yet?

Just keep repeating two words..."Rick" "Baker"....
Dude it's probably gonna be the faculty with werewolves. As long as I see alot of munch, munch and some kickass werewolves. Then it's all good from my side.

He's basically taking the breakfast club stereotypes. Maybe adding a little twists to them here and there and throwing in werewolves. Plus there's nothing wrong with writing films with teens.

As long as their not shitty films with teens.

PEACE OUT!
Reply
post #14 of 23
12/7/02 at 5:14pm
Quote:
SuperNova:
Reading the article Johnny posted about Cursed reminded me of another werewolf film, An American Werewolf in Paris. I don't know if the two will be anything alike, but if that article is any hint of what is to come, then you might as well cross this film off your calendar next year. Maybe it's just me, but if I was making a werewolf movie I'd be thinking about the design of the werewolf first rather then how sensitive a character is,
I disagree, because you might have the coolest werewolf ever, but if he's in a crap movie without a decent enough story and nothing characters, it's meaningless.

It's like Pumpkinhead is a really great monster, but Pumpkinhead 2: Blood Wings sucks.

And there's no listing of the werewolf there, as that was a character breakdown that is used for casting. They don't need to cast a werewolf because he's going to be played by latex, so there's no reason to mention one.
Reply
post #15 of 23
12/8/02 at 12:02pm
Quote:
piranhapictures
[/qb]
And there's no listing of the werewolf there, as that was a character breakdown that is used for casting. They don't need to cast a werewolf because he's going to be played by latex, so there's no reason to mention one.[/QB][/QUOTE]

I really have to question that statement because, you see casting the 'killer' in you're film or what have you can make or break your movie as well. You could easily cast someone to play the part, but what if that person cannot act or in this films instance does not know how to be a werewolf, then well you have a walking Frankenstein covered in ten pounds of paint, latex and fur. Maybe it's me, but this is very important, think how good Dick Warlock was in Halloween II or how good Gunnar was as Leatherface, heck I'll even go on the record and mention Dan O Bannon. In Return of the living dead instead of casting some ordinary guy to play the role as tar man, Dan found an actor who fitted the role perfect. I have no clue if the wolf they use in this film will be some animatronics one or just plain CGI, I just get upset because some people don't relies how vital 'that guy under all that make-up' is to your film.
Reply
post #16 of 23
12/8/02 at 1:07pm
Thread Starter 
the one interesting thing they could do with the sequel/prequel-

(SPOILERS)

+
+
+
They didn't reveal who the first werewolf in Ginger Snaps was (that attacked ginger). They could possibly twist that around somehow and make it a little bit interesting, but who knows. I'm just praying they don't expand on the ending like Ms. Werewolf Gurl said....like if they show the last shot of the film, then show her gradually breathing again...gah...or find a miracle cure...

(end spoilers)

Well, i'll check them out, but my hopes are low. The only thing I pray they do is bring back the mother too, she was funny as hell.

Reply
post #17 of 23
12/8/02 at 1:27pm
Quote:
SuperNova:
Quote:
piranhapictures
And there's no listing of the werewolf there, as that was a character breakdown that is used for casting. They don't need to cast a werewolf because he's going to be played by latex, so there's no reason to mention one.[/QB]
I really have to question that statement because, you see casting the 'killer' in you're film or what have you can make or break your movie as well. You could easily cast someone to play the part, but what if that person cannot act or in this films instance does not know how to be a werewolf, then well you have a walking Frankenstein covered in ten pounds of paint, latex and fur. Maybe it's me, but this is very important, think how good Dick Warlock was in Halloween II or how good Gunnar was as Leatherface, heck I'll even go on the record and mention Dan O Bannon. In Return of the living dead instead of casting some ordinary guy to play the role as tar man, Dan found an actor who fitted the role perfect. I have no clue if the wolf they use in this film will be some animatronics one or just plain CGI, I just get upset because some people don't relies how vital 'that guy under all that make-up' is to your film.[/QB][/QUOTE]

Maybe, but I'd think if they were making a real modern werewolf movie, it's either going to be a puppet or CGI. Besides Wolf, what recent werewolf movie has had a guy in makeup?
Reply
post #18 of 23
12/8/02 at 3:55pm
Quote:
piranhapictures:
Quote:
SuperNova:
Quote:
piranhapictures
And there's no listing of the werewolf there, as that was a character breakdown that is used for casting. They don't need to cast a werewolf because he's going to be played by latex, so there's no reason to mention one.
I really have to question that statement because, you see casting the 'killer' in you're film or what have you can make or break your movie as well. You could easily cast someone to play the part, but what if that person cannot act or in this films instance does not know how to be a werewolf, then well you have a walking Frankenstein covered in ten pounds of paint, latex and fur. Maybe it's me, but this is very important, think how good Dick Warlock was in Halloween II or how good Gunnar was as Leatherface, heck I'll even go on the record and mention Dan O Bannon. In Return of the living dead instead of casting some ordinary guy to play the role as tar man, Dan found an actor who fitted the role perfect. I have no clue if the wolf they use in this film will be some animatronics one or just plain CGI, I just get upset because some people don't relies how vital 'that guy under all that make-up' is to your film.[/QB]
Maybe, but I'd think if they were making a real modern werewolf movie, it's either going to be a puppet or CGI. Besides Wolf, what recent werewolf movie has had a guy in makeup?[/QB][/QUOTE]

Uhm correct me if I am wrong but Dog Soldiers had several.
Reply
post #19 of 23
12/9/02 at 3:20am
I haven't seen that one yet, but from the pictures I've seen they looked more like the Howling type of wolf. For something like that, they probably cast stuntmen. You don't put out a generalized casting notice for that usually. If the actor in the movie who becomes a werewolf plays this type of wolf, he'd probably be doubled.

As for this sequel, it sounds horrible right off the bat. They either have to ignore the ending or fudge something. Too bad that they're going to make a most-likely bad movie to follow up a really good one. For me, that is what ruins horror movies...no matter how it ends, you just know some crappy sequel will come along.

<img src="http://piranhapictures.crosswinds.net/Werewolf/Wolf_puppet_first_shot.JPG" alt="" />
Reply
post #20 of 23
12/19/02 at 8:23pm
Good stuff (IMO) came down the line today...

<a href="http://www.creature-corner.com/news3/dec19ginger2.php3" target="_blank">Plot info a go-go!</a>
Reply
post #21 of 23
12/19/02 at 8:39pm
Thread Starter 
"Yes, Ginger will be featured, but only in dreams and a few other "key sequences". "

Well that sounds better. Key Sequences sounds ominous though...she better not bust through the floor at the end of the movie and save her sister from impeding doom.
Reply
post #22 of 23
12/20/02 at 1:31am
Quote:
Make werewolf girls scream on our MESSAGE BOARDS
eek! eek! eek!

Damn you Butane...
Reply
post #23 of 23
12/20/02 at 1:33am
As for the plot of the upcoming movie, it sounds like it MIGHT work but I am still really skeptical. The rehab thing sounds interesting anyways.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Creature Corner Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › CREATURE CORNER › Creature Corner Main › Ginger Snaps Sequels