Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunmaster45
I think it's the false sense of nostalgia to the series at this point. It's been running almost 10 years, that's a pretty simple way to trick people into seeing quality in it.
That and what turned out to be a pretty effective system for the series, being the next two sequels (2Fast2Furious and The Tokyo Drift) were poorly made and dropped many of the lead actors that made the first movie above "God awful" status. By bringing back all the original actors to the 4th, and even adding The Rock to the 5th, they made the fans feel that these HAD to be better than the two that dropped the cast, and that "bringing back the old gang" again, gave it some minor nostalgia points.
If all that's too deep though, we live in America, where a film that consists of tits, ass, cars, guns, and deemed attractive B-list actors is all that people are looking for. Not many film scholars these days, too many of today's teenagers want to get wasted/blazed and watch boobs bounce and shit blow up for two hours.
|
Not just teenagers. I enjoy that shit too (in moderation). It's just that there are many better options for me than the "Fast and the Furious" franchise. So why choose this one?
Your theory about nostalgia makes sense; it's just that many of the kids seeing "Fast Five" today (the 12- to 18-year olds) are too young to remember the original, and therefore to be nostalgic. When franchises endure for 10+ years, there's usually something cross-generational about them. I can't figure out what it is about this particular franchise, and it certainly isn't cars, hotties, and guns alone. Is it Vin Diesel? Or Paul Walker? (both of whom were pretty much has-beens when "Fast & Furious" came out) Or is it just seeing Vin Diesel and Paul Walker drive fast cars?
That being said, this particular movie actually got decent reviews (68, or "Generally Favorable" on Metacritic). Though I doubt that would make a difference one way or the other.