Franchises and Why I Hate That Term

I freed myself from "franchise" mindsets a long time ago. I reject the notion that just one lousy game/movie/episode could possibly defile an entire long-winded series, especially when it keeps going and makes improvements in future installations (though in Sonic's case that's a point for debate--Unleashed was steps ahead of Heroes, yet had its own problems). As for James Bond, there have been plenty of times in which the series had some very lousy outings, from 007 in a clown suit to a "Star Wars"-esque space battle to the very lackluster Timothy Dalton movies and even "Die Another Day." And yet, with the same producers and studio, Bond keeps going such that new and enjoyable Bond films arrived to bounce back from the letdowns.

Is "Star Wars: A New Hope" any less the classic because of the prequels? Is "Highlander" unwatchable just because of the godawful sequels it spawned? Can you never read the graphic novel Watchmen because you hated Zack Snyder's movie (like this guy)? If one thinks that a single lousy sequel/spinoff/whatever else can ruin a whole "franchise," then eventually there may come a point where there won't be anything left to enjoy because everything was "ruined."

I say: let a game be a game and let a movie be a movie, and if you don't like this game or that movie, then move right along to the next one. I say: terms such as "You're only as good as the last thing in your series" does a major discredit to the best in one's series.

I can somewhat agree.

I own all the James Bond films, and I can easily tell from when they let everyone down and then reboot the series. However, Moonraker is one of my favorites, but the laser battle was just dumb. Licence to Kill was pretty awesome, too. I also know the guy that flew the plane in Octopussy, was the stunt coordinator for Moonraker, drove the truck on half of its wheels in Licence to Kill, and landed the Cessna in GoldenEye. Either way, Die Another Day was a complete crapfest.

But the franchise that annoys me the most is the Sonic franchise. I stopped being a fan because Heroes plainly sucked and the other games seemed to suck, too. A lot of the fanbase likes to just look at a game and go "hey look, a new Sonic game came out, so I'm automatically going to buy it and play it and like it." I find it dumb and childish. Sadly, it's true.

Independence76 wrote:

But the franchise that annoys me the most is the Sonic franchise. I stopped being a fan because Heroes plainly sucked and the other games seemed to suck, too. A lot of the fanbase likes to just look at a game and go "hey look, a new Sonic game came out, so I'm automatically going to buy it and play it and like it." I find it dumb and childish. Sadly, it's true.

I admit that Heroes was nothing too special, and when it comes to Sonic games, I judge them they way I'd judge any other game under the sun: would I like it? Just because it's a Sonic game does not give it special treatment from me, and trying to automatically love or hate something before even having firsthand exposure to it, from where I stand, is silly.

as a critic i play games and watch movies and shows before i judge them then if i get tot he end i ask myself was it good or not, then treat it that way even if it's a series i like (ace combat for example) I care if i have fun not if it's realistic looking ok now i'm ranting... but it needed to be said...

good bye

Kriegsmarine wrote:as a critic

i play games and watch movies and shows before i judge them then if i get tot he end i ask myself was it good or not, then treat it that way even if it's a series i like (ace combat for example) I care if i have fun not if it's realistic looking ok now i'm ranting... but it needed to be said...

good bye

For a critic, you made quite the score of grammatical mistakes.

Well, if that's good for you, then fine.
But I still like the term franchises. Rarely do franchises disappoint me, and I can't really Sonic or Star Wars has yet to.