The Matrix

Short Answer: Animatrix 2

There were 20 years for Neo inside the Matrix between parts 3 and 4 of the series... but 60 years in reality? Not sure how that works, since others are involved-- in both realities-- but whatever.

Meanwhile, only six months separate parts 1 and 2.  No time passes between parts 2 and 3. 

In any case, stuff happened before the first movie, between the movies, and in other places while the movies' events were happening. Many of those events were shown in animated form in a series of very well made shorts collected as the Animatrix.

Well, with so much time passing between parts 3 and 4, isn't time for another installation of the Animatrix, to help fill in the gap in the story? It can tie up loose ends, plug plot holes, even introduce other ideas, all like the first set of animations did. 

Many new animators have emerged on the scene since 2003, when the first Animatrix dropped. It would be insane to think they could get another one released in 2023, in time for the 20th anniversary (it's late July 2022 as I write this)-- but shooting for the 25th anniversary in 2028? 

Doable. A new Animatrix on the original's 25th anniversary would be news.

 

Expendables

Short Answer: Even more action actors

There is a pattern we see in any number of movies: Collect Them All. Often, it is a bunch of similarly themed animated animals off on an adventure-- woodland ones, Ice Age ones, zoo animals, tropical birds, etc.

For action movies, this often translates into putting all the superheroes in one team. In the case of the Expendables movies, the idea is to collect all the acton stars from the 1970s and '80s-- when action stars were not super or magical-- and put them in a movie. 

They were, basically, cowboy heroes, but in city (or maybe wilderness) environments-- take Charles Bronson, who went from Westerns to the Death Wish movies. They could punch, maybe kick. They could run, jump, and shoot. Some could work grenade launchers or fly helicopters. That was about it, but it was enough to kick the bad guys' butts. 

Well, even three movies in, the Expendables forgot Kurt Russell and Rutger Hauer.

Also, if Jet Li and Chuck Norris are in the series (which they are, or I would not be bringing it up), then where is Jackie Chan? And several other martial-arts superstars I could mention? Chow Yun-fat comes to mind. David Carradine. 

Also, I see Wesley Snipes, but where is Richard Roundtree? Michael Jai White? Billy Dee Williams? Mario Van Peebles? Danny Glover? Rocky actors Carl Weathers and Mr. T? Action comes in more than one, um, color.

There are also two few women in the mix. Linda Hamilton should be there. Sigourney Weaver. Pam Greer. Michelle Yeoh. The late 1970s ushered in an era of damsels who were not all that distressed and could rescue themselves, thank you very much. By the 1980s, women and whoop-ass were a common team. 

The Expendables should be... expandable. 

Narnia

Short Answer: Just finish the series, already

Look, Harry Potter ran out of books, but they kept going. Game of Thrones ran out of books, but they kept going. Even Lord of the Rings ran out of books, but they kept going.

The Narnia series hasn't even run out of books! Why the heck did they stop... going?

As you can see, the public has not run out of interest in fantasy movies. The Hobbits-- well, the actors who played them-- were just at a convention in my town this past weekend, here in 2022. They were so famous, my coworker had to write an essay just to see them.

The Lion, etc. came out in 2005. Prince Caspian, 2008. Dawn Treader, 2010. They have been talking about Silver Chair for a while now. Again, it's already 2022.

There is talk of Netflix rebooting the series, since anyone who saw the original in theaters at, say 15, is 32 now and might even have their own kids. Maybe it will be a series of movies, maybe a TV show. 

Who knows. They've had the rights since 2018. Probably, they will sit on them and prevent anyone from doing anything with them, so as to not distract from the Tolkien prequel they are supposed to drop in September (it's July 2022 now). 

Anyway, Narnia... there are four books still pining on the shelves to be made into movies. The Narnia series is one of the most venerable in the entire genre. Again, the viewers' thirst for fantasy is not slaked. They are even willing to go to the Fantastic Beasts movies! 

Look, 2025 is soon. That will be the 20th anniversary of the first Narnia movie. Just re-release that into theaters, maybe with some touched up CGI with today's improved tech. Then re-release the others, even to streaming, so viewers can catch up, and go from there. Liam Neeson is, thankfully, still around to do Aslan's rumbling voice.

Then make Silver Chair, Horse and His Boy, Magician's Nephew, and Last Battle. Four more books, four more movies. It'll be like printing money.

Speaking of fantastic beasts... dragons have been in for a long time now... where are the Pern movies, already? The novel series started in 1967. 

Superman

Short Answer: Fight the rest of his villains/ Have an identity crisis

The first Superman movie, he fights Lex Luthor. In the second one, he fights Zod. By the third one, he is already fighting his evil self. And then in the fourth movie... Lex again.

In Superman Returns? Lex again, again! Man of Steel? Zod again. And then in Dawn of Justice... he fights Batman-- just kidding, it was Lex behind everything the whole time. Surprise!

But here's the thing. In his TV shows and comic books, Superman fights... and you're not going to believe this... OTHER bad guys. I know! Mindblowing.

So, um, can he fight them in a movie? 

Please?

There are Brainiac, Bizarro, Parasite, Mr. Myxzptlk... that's four more movies right there.

Batman gets to fight all his bad guys. Spiderman gets to fight all his bad guys... at once! So why does Superman only get to fight either someone with no powers, or someone with his same powers?

And, while we're at it, let's not go back to the well on kryptonite again as his weakness. I know, crazy! But Supes is also vulnerable to magic. So... work with that. Why does Marvel get to own magic as an idea? DC has Dr. Fate, Zatanna... and magical baddies, too. 

The more interesting answer comes from a conversation I had with a friend. One of us said that, really, he IS Superman and Clark is the alter ego. And other said nah, it's like it always says-- he was raised Clark and IS Clark, so Superman is the alter ego.

But then we realized the TRUTH: that he IS Kal-El... and BOTH Clark and Superman are personas he adopts to exist in different situations. He NEVER gets to just be himself, except when he is alone. When he is with anyone else, he had to pretend-- either to be a normal earthling, or a Justice Leaguer. 

So THERE's your movie-- the decades of never being allowed to be himself have worn on Kal-El, and he's having a mental breakdown. Think about how that would resonate with today's audiences! 

And wouldn't fighting one of those afore-mentioned villains bring him to that state? They have mental-bending, mind-screwing, power-sucking, perspective-blasting powers... any of them could make him-- force him-- to confront who he really is, and how he's always been a fraud to everyone he's ever known. Even Lois. 

(And... maybe we found the Superman movie Nic Cage was meant to be in all along? Who portrays mental breakdowns better?)