What Film Are You Surprised Didn't Get A Sequel?TehBamski@lemmy.world to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world – 233 points – 11 months ago373Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsShow the parent commentThey did it to themselves by barely advertising and dropping the 'of Mars' from the title, both for stupid reasons. Maybe they had to, given the barely passing resemblence to the source material.If I recall correctly it was because of "Mars needs Moms" was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.3 more...
They did it to themselves by barely advertising and dropping the 'of Mars' from the title, both for stupid reasons. Maybe they had to, given the barely passing resemblence to the source material.If I recall correctly it was because of "Mars needs Moms" was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.3 more...
Maybe they had to, given the barely passing resemblence to the source material.If I recall correctly it was because of "Mars needs Moms" was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.
If I recall correctly it was because of "Mars needs Moms" was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.
They did it to themselves by barely advertising and dropping the 'of Mars' from the title, both for stupid reasons.
Maybe they had to, given the barely passing resemblence to the source material.
If I recall correctly it was because of "Mars needs Moms" was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.