A few things to consider: 1. Has the Blockbuster Buster ever covered "Wired", the 1989 biopic that starred Michael Chiklis as John Belushi but was trashed by critics along with many friends and relatives of Belushi? To be fair, Chiklis grew up idolizing John Belushi, and like many other Belushi fans and associates, he was upset beyond words when John passed away. Mike's performance as John wasn't bad, but the movie as a whole definitely was. 2. Jim Belushi was originally set to co-star with Dan Aykroyd and John Goodman, but couldn't due to a scheduling conflict with his commitment to the short-lived 1997 ABC drama "Total Security". "According to Jim" didn't debut until October 2001. 3. Dan definitely should have gone for a role in the 1995 Oliver Stone film "Nixon". Not only would it have given him an opportunity to star alongside his wife Donna Dixon, but it also would have opened up the door for potential reconciliation between him and Mike.
@AndrewBloom I like that number 2 fact best. In fact, even if Jim was unavailable in Blues Brothers 2000 Dan Aykroyd and John Landis should have split the film into separate parts because this film looks to me like one of them. Meaning that they should have made a third movie in the following year 1999. So that way Jim wouldn't be unavailable for that. And this time they should get some other writers to make it a more proper story. And just to let you know I'm using my imagination for what it's like if a third movie was made. What do you think it would be like if a third Blues Brothers movie existed. Please reply back.
How about Michael Chiklis? He's definitely got the pipes, as demonstrated on his 2016 album "Influence". Plus, Jim Belushi can't hit very high notes like Mike can.
Jim Belushi would have been good and it's a pity he wasn't there, heck in live performances John Candy was sort of an honorary blues brother at one point but sadly...Candy much like John Belushi isn't alive anymore.
You know what the problem with the this sequal, their no reason to bring the band together, They all have good jobs and everything was resovles and raise money for the ophanage.
RIP Aretha Franklin.
0:00, Now that is one amazing enterance if I ever saw one
3:14, Why on Earth do I have a feeling that an Animated Blues Bros. Series would've been a BETTER SEQUEL than Blues Brothers 2000 itself?
A few things to consider:
1. Has the Blockbuster Buster ever covered "Wired", the 1989 biopic that starred Michael Chiklis as John Belushi but was trashed by critics along with many friends and relatives of Belushi? To be fair, Chiklis grew up idolizing John Belushi, and like many other Belushi fans and associates, he was upset beyond words when John passed away. Mike's performance as John wasn't bad, but the movie as a whole definitely was.
2. Jim Belushi was originally set to co-star with Dan Aykroyd and John Goodman, but couldn't due to a scheduling conflict with his commitment to the short-lived 1997 ABC drama "Total Security". "According to Jim" didn't debut until October 2001.
3. Dan definitely should have gone for a role in the 1995 Oliver Stone film "Nixon". Not only would it have given him an opportunity to star alongside his wife Donna Dixon, but it also would have opened up the door for potential reconciliation between him and Mike.
@AndrewBloom I like that number 2 fact best. In fact, even if Jim was unavailable in Blues Brothers 2000 Dan Aykroyd and John Landis should have split the film into separate parts because this film looks to me like one of them. Meaning that they should have made a third movie in the following year 1999. So that way Jim wouldn't be unavailable for that. And this time they should get some other writers to make it a more proper story. And just to let you know I'm using my imagination for what it's like if a third movie was made.
What do you think it would be like if a third Blues Brothers movie existed. Please reply back.
@@1997calvert Considering there was rumors for a while of a Netflix Blues Brothers series, yes I can see that happening.
E-Rod would honestly makes for a way better Blues Brother than Cabel or Buster
How about Michael Chiklis? He's definitely got the pipes, as demonstrated on his 2016 album "Influence". Plus, Jim Belushi can't hit very high notes like Mike can.
@@andrewbloom7637 him too
Jim Belushi would have been good and it's a pity he wasn't there, heck in live performances John Candy was sort of an honorary blues brother at one point but sadly...Candy much like John Belushi isn't alive anymore.
There was a game based on this sequel. I kid you not. Released for N64.
Also how strong are those thumb taxes,
Did they get em from poundland.
The 1st Blues Brothers is WWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYY better than Blues Brothers 2000
when the fuck did ardmin & laika studios take over
There has been talk of a Netflix show based on it in recent years, but I don't think i've heard any news of it recently.
Really?
Do they really gotta call cabel (cable?) cab? Because his dad is Cab Calloway? C'mon.
You know what the problem with the this sequal, their no reason to bring the band together,
They all have good jobs and everything was resovles and raise money for the ophanage.
Yes, "You gotta tell him about Jake" was jarring, off-putting and depressing. But worst of all, it was the best part of the picture.
in all honesty i havent had the time to watch the first but DAMN this is depressing
The original film is one of the greatest, man. Do yourself a favour.
You will not be disappointed
Especially since we found out in this one that the orphanage closed up anyway
Seriously f$&@ this movie
Glad I skipped this one
And its a good thing I didn't know SQUAT about Blues Brothers 2000, or the first Blues Brothers Film, until many Years later.