It feels a little hypocritical to say that one movie might need a sequel or a reboot while another doesn’t, but the truth of the matter is that a movie like The Great Outdoors really doesn’t need a sequel and shouldn’t get one since it was fine just the way it was. Sadly, it does sound as though this is going to happen since Dan Aykroyd has every intention of creating a sequel to the movie that he and John Candy made so popular back in the late 80s. Some folks might think of this as a great turn of events since it might bring back an old classic, but one has to wonder how many of the original actors would actually like to come back and why the movie couldn’t be left as it was. In a way, it almost feels as though the reboot and sequel bug bit at the same time a while back, and the fallout of that act is still happening as many older movies are now getting the reboot, remake, and sequel treatment. The unfortunate part is that a lot of them don’t need it. Here are five reasons why The Great Outdoors sequel shouldn’t happen.
5. Classics like this don’t need sequels that often.
The movie went from one point to the next in a rather simple fashion and didn’t deviate enough to really need a lot of closure when it was all over and done with. It’s fair to say that there are other directions that things could have gone and there might be a chance to see other stories spring up from this, but the main thrust of the story was over and done with by the time the credits started to roll. The two families had reconciled, come together, and were bound for another adventure when they returned home since Roman and his family were moving in while Chet and his family would have to adjust. But it was an adventure for another day, not necessarily one that had to be fleshed out.
4. The humor has to change.
The same humor that was so popular in the 80s is being continually vilified today as outdated and not as PC as people would like. In fact, Dan Aykroyd has been one of those who openly states that the humor of decades past is no longer relevant and doesn’t need to be pushed any further. It’s likely that recalls a lot of the humor that he helped build back in the day, but maybe he forgot the laughs that came as the result and the fame that helped to elevate his career to where it’s at now. Granted, there’s no need for some of the humor that the 80s were famous for, but if the humor in the original movie changed it would definitely disrupt the flow.
3. A lot of people today don’t connect with this type of story.
Folks might decide to say that they do since they were growing up in this era, if they’re in their late 30s to 40s maybe, but a lot of others have no idea what the 80s were even about and why things appear the way they do in the movies. It’s akin to reading a book about the wild west and thinking that you might know anything about how life really was back then from a first-person perspective. Honestly, a lot of people that might be getting into the whole resurgence of the 80s and 90s don’t have any real basis for what went on back in those days. That’s why this story might not resonate with quite a few people.
2. The story won’t be the same.
Trying to dispute this would be a huge mistake since not only is the story not the same, but it couldn’t be the same since it would be a poor facsimile of the original movie and therefore more of a mockery than anything. Dan Aykroyd is a great comedian and actor as well as a storyteller, which is why it’s a little confusing as to why he would take this movie as one of those that he wants to try and continue forward with, knowing very well that people enjoyed the first movie and might actually think that a sequel is a poor follow-up to an idea that was good once but was essentially lightning in a bottle.
1. You can’t replace or do without John Candy.
Seriously, Aykroyd is great, but on his own, there are times when he really needs someone of his caliber to make the story work. Look at a movie such as My Stepmother is an Alien for example and realize that as great as he is, Aykroyd needs someone else there to be great with. On his own, he’s not bad at all, but with someone else to feed into the comedy and to build something with, he’s that much better. John Candy was the perfect actor to pair with Aykroyd for this movie since the two of them had such great chemistry together, so thinking that Aykroyd could do this well with someone else is possible, but it still wouldn’t be the same. It’s the same old fan-based argument, but it’s one that a lot of people wish the celebrities would listen to from time to time.Dan Aykroyd
Tell us what's wrong with this post? How could we improve it? :)
Let us improve this post!