Originally Posted by
butters
This movie doesn't really interest me, but a question for those familiar w/ the story.... (I'm not at all trying to troll here...) -
Was there something lacking from the actual story in the first movie that needed to be retold? I'm not familiar with the story apart from what was presented in the films, so I'm wondering, what was missing? (Again, honest question, not trolling.)
I know the rights changed hands and maybe there was a desire to reset the style for further sequels, but I'm wondering more about the story aspect of this vs. the 2002 film. Was something "wrong" in the first one?