What was the last movie you've seen?

[Forlorn Drifter]

I haven't ever watched much Bond, I might try getting into the Craig stuff for a bit of a start. I'm interested to see who the next Bond might be.

[REPO Man]

By no means a good film, even if judged by made-for-TV standards. But it's a lot better than people give it credit for.

And I hope there's a sequel, considering the film's epilogue:

has Erica Raymond, defeated with her control of Starlight Records taken after Rio reveals his father's will that says Rio gets the company when "[he] feels [he's] ready", finding The Misfits. After a tense reunion with the band, after Erica apparently tossed The Misfits aside, Erica reveals that Jem and Rio are dating, which catches the attention of Pizzazz (played by Kesha), who apparently expresses interest in helping Erica bring down Jem.

[prfsnl_gmr]

And I hope there's a sequel, considering the film's epilogue

That movie is, basically, the queen of movie flops, and there will never, ever, ever, ever be a sequel (unless you make it, REPO!). It was made on a $5 million budget, and despite a relatively wide release, failed to make even that amount back.

Jem was the 1980s distilled into its purest form. It was as ’80s as Spuds Mackenzie snorting cocaine off a Patrick Nagel illustration of the entire Vanity 6 lineup voting for Ronald Reagan. It was as ’80s as Jan Hammer playing an extended keytar solo. So the first curious move the filmmakers made, en route to making one of the biggest flops in recent memory (the film was pulled from theaters after just two weeks, and somehow never came close to making back even its microscopic $5 million budget) was taking this blast from the past and making it so desperately, relentlessly contemporary that it immediately felt dated.

[REPO Man]

Uh... Sharknado got two sequels. Twilight and The Hunger Games each got three sequels. GI Joe got a sequel. Uwe Boll's House of the Dead adaptation got a sequel. And Boll's Bloodrayne film got a few sequels.

So tell me again why Jem won't get a sequel.

[TSTR]

it didnt make any money?

[jp1]

it didnt make any money?

[prfsnl_gmr]

it didnt make any money?

That's right! All of the movies REPO listed are very bad, but all of them made money. Jen, on the other hand, was a financial disaster.

[darsparx]

it didnt make any money?

That's right! All of the movies REPO listed are very bad, but all of them made money. Jen, on the other hand, was a financial disaster.

And a horrible representation of the series...it's obvious the people who wrote or were actually involved with the series even had a part in the movie...all it's got is name and like 1 event from the show going for it(and not even the one they should've focused on...)

[KalessinDB]

Uh... Sharknado got two sequels. Twilight and The Hunger Games each got three sequels. GI Joe got a sequel. Uwe Boll's House of the Dead adaptation got a sequel. And Boll's Bloodrayne film got a few sequels.

So tell me again why Jem won't get a sequel.

Sharknado captivated the nation and made a decent amount of money from advertising (plus TV movies typically cost less than theatre movies to produce)

Twilight and The Hunger Games were based on established book franchises that had made zillions of dollars, and the movies did the same.

GI Joe was based on an established TV/toy franchise that has made zillions of dollars, and the movie made good money.

Uwe Boll lives in a magical world (Germany) where he can still make money on his films despite them being major flops because tax shelters!

Noticing a difference between all the (admittedly horrible) movies you mentioned and Jem?

[darsparx]

Well jem is a established franchise too but they completely botched the live adaption to the point of it being mostly unrecognizable as Jem except by name...how the thing made it out of production I will never understand