DVD Talk
What Are The Great Prequels? [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : What Are The Great Prequels?


dhmac
06-08-12, 08:23 PM
I was thinking about movies that are tied to other movies. And, yes, there have been some great sequels and even some great remakes. But have there been any great prequels? At all?!

I was stumped and couldn't think of any. Yeah, The Godfather, Part II was partially a prequel in a way and could (partially) count, I guess. But what else?!?? (...and, sorry to disappoint, but The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly is simply not a prequel! Just watch those movies again - and pay extra attention to the character's names - if you still think so.)


So are there any great prequels???

TGM
06-08-12, 08:32 PM
arguably JJ's Star Trek reboot.

Screwadu
06-08-12, 08:33 PM
Is Temple of Doom considered "great"?

Rockmjd23
06-08-12, 08:39 PM
Missing in Action II: The Beginning

davidh777
06-08-12, 08:41 PM
Not sure about "great," but I enjoyed X-Men First Class and Rise of the POTA

Boba Fett
06-08-12, 08:49 PM
Is Temple of Doom considered "great"?

I'd say so. Most have never and will never see it on a big screen, but it's an amazing spectacle and I praise it for not rehashing RotLA which TLC does but is generally beloved.

Ky-Fi
06-08-12, 08:52 PM
Hopefully The Hobbit will make this list.

antspawn
06-08-12, 08:54 PM
Rise of The Lycans

islandclaws
06-08-12, 09:17 PM
Amityville II
Paranormal Activity 3
Cube: Zero
Final Destination 5

Supermallet
06-08-12, 09:51 PM
Paranormal Activity 2
Temple of Doom
X-Men First Class
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
The prequel portions of Godfather: Part II
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me

Dragon Tattoo
06-08-12, 10:54 PM
The Powerpuff Girls Movie

davidh777
06-08-12, 11:02 PM
Hopefully The Hobbit will make this list.

I was thinking the same thing :)

TomOpus
06-08-12, 11:08 PM
The Powerpuff Girls MovieNot surprising.

Michael Corvin
06-08-12, 11:13 PM
Amityville II
Paranormal Activity 3
Cube: Zero
Final Destination 5

That last one is a pretty big fucking spoiler.

SkullOrchard
06-08-12, 11:33 PM
Rise of the Planet of the Apes

PopcornTreeCt
06-09-12, 12:46 AM
Temple of Doom :lol:

Rise of the Planet of the Apes and X-Men First Class are pretty good but they're not great. There hasn't been a great prequel yet.

lordwow
06-09-12, 09:48 PM
I wouldn't say it's better than the original by any means, but Red Dragon is a very solid entry in the series.

JumpCutz
06-10-12, 12:54 AM
I know I'm alone here, but this Paul Schrader film. Hugely underrated.

http://0.tqn.com/d/movies/1/0/G/m/6/dominionexorcistposter.jpg

Boba Fett
06-10-12, 01:02 AM
Temple of Doom :lol:

Rise of the Planet of the Apes and X-Men First Class are pretty good but they're not great. There hasn't been a great prequel yet.
Make an argument that GFII is not a pure prequel, but you can't argue that THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY

Mazje
06-10-12, 01:41 AM
Back to the Future II (ish)?

Mondo Kane
06-10-12, 01:58 AM
Make an argument that GFII is not a pure prequel, but you can't argue that THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY

The OP rules GBU out based on names (Or nicknames, maybe?) but I always considered GBU a prequel too (The Civil War setting, The gaining of the man-with-no-name's poncho) GBU even seems to end right into the start of Fistful/Dollars too. At least I thought that lead-in was intentional since I saw the trilogy arranged in a specific order on a certain Cinemax-triple header that night.

DJariya
06-10-12, 02:08 AM
Trying to stick with stuff that hasn't already been mentioned:

Infernal Affairs II and III

Granted they weren't as critically acclaimed as Part I. Plus, Edison Chen and Shawn Yue are nowhere near as good actors as Andy Lau and Tony Leung, but IMO they were really solid prequels that gave alot of good backstory to the mythology of the series.

These were straight to video and very low budget, but I thought they were pretty entertaining.

Wrong Turn 4

Vacancy 2

SkipKassidy
06-10-12, 03:57 AM
Mallrats (events occur before Clerks)

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - it doesn't trump Raiders, but it's still good

Captain America: The First Avenger - my favorite of The Avengers "prequels" (and I use prequel in the loose sense as they were lead-ins after all).

dhmac
06-10-12, 10:13 AM
The OP rules GBU out based on names (Or nicknames, maybe?) but I always considered GBU a prequel too (The Civil War setting, The gaining of the man-with-no-name's poncho) GBU even seems to end right into the start of Fistful/Dollars too. At least I thought that lead-in was intentional since I saw the trilogy arranged in a specific order on a certain Cinemax-triple header that night.

While Sergio Leone's "Dollars" films can be called a trilogy due to stylistic connections, it's a loose trilogy at best and I don't think it's an actual trilogy following the exact same lead character in connected films.


Some arguments against it being an actual trilogy that stars the same lead character:

- The whole "Man With No Name" trilogy angle was invented by the American distributing studio after-the-fact in order to market the films. While they were being made, there was no sense that they were all following the exact same nameless character around. Clint Eastwood's character actually has different names in each one: Joe, Manco, and Blondie. Regardless of whether those are names or nicknames, it shows that he is a "Man With A Name" in each film.

- Lee Van Cleef's main character dies in The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly but he also plays a main character in For A Few Dollars More. So did he just come back from the dead and, in this new life, change his ways and switch from being the adversary of Eastwood's character to being his buddy? (And admitting that he is playing two different characters is an argument AGAINST it being an actual trilogy, not one for.)

- Storywise, nothing ties the films together, with the lead character played by Clint Eastwood needing to make money in both A Fistful of Dollars and A Few Dollars More but ending up extremely wealthy with a lot of gold at the end of The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly. If TGTBATU truly lead directly into AFOD, then what happened to all his gold? And why did his horse get replaced by a mule?

- Sergio Leone never intended for the films to be considered an actual trilogy. If the films are an auteur's vision, shouldn't the director's view of his films count more than the that of the marketing department of a studio distributor?


The only argument for it being an actual trilogy that's following the exact same lead character:

- Clint Eastwood wears the same clothes in all of them. And that's it: his clothes. (Yes, in The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, he does only get his distinctive poncho near the end of the film, but that - and that alone - is the extent of claiming that he is actually playing the exact same character. And I personally think his character is more of slight variations on a iconic theme than anything else.)



So, IMO, clothes alone are not enough to make something an actual trilogy.

Solid Snake
06-10-12, 10:55 AM
Yeah. They're not related. They just have a stylistic theme going on. It's like the vengeance trilogy. Are they literally a trilogy? No. But they are based off theme.

Drexl
06-10-12, 10:57 AM
Captain America: The First Avenger - my favorite of The Avengers "prequels" (and I use prequel in the loose sense as they were lead-ins after all).

I don't see how that can count at all because it was made and released first. I might as well mention The Empire Strikes Back as a "prequel" to Return of the Jedi.

Solid Snake
06-10-12, 11:02 AM
well we did have The Incredible Hulk and IM. But yes..it's not a prequel.

Jules Winfield
06-10-12, 11:04 AM
There is currently no great prequel. There are good prequels but no great one. Rise of the Planet of the Apes comes close but it seems like the beginning to a new series. I love Temple of Doom but it might as well be a sequel and it's not like it reveals the intricate backstory of Indiana Jones. It's just an adventure in his life.

Jules Winfield
06-10-12, 11:08 AM
I did like X-Men First Class also. It might be the closest to a great prequel for me.

Solid Snake
06-10-12, 11:09 AM
There is currently no great prequel. There are good prequels but no great one. Rise of the Planet of the Apes comes close but it seems like the beginning to a new series. I love Temple of Doom but it might as well be a sequel and it's not like it reveals the intricate backstory of Indiana Jones. It's just an adventure in his life.

Yeah RoTA is a reboot.

And w/ ToD it really doesn't have anything connecting storywise to Raiders. It's just...another adventure Indy had before Raiders.

dhmac
06-10-12, 11:24 AM
And w/ ToD it really doesn't have anything connecting storywise to Raiders. It's just...another adventure Indy had before Raiders.
And the only thing making Temple of Doom a prequel is the year "1935" being displayed at the beginning. Without that in the movie, it's a sequel.

And within Temple of Doom, it seems to be more of a sequel than a prequel in the scene when Indy runs into the guy with the sword and reaches for his gun expecting to just shoot the guy, like he did to a different sword guy in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but then being surprised to find his gun is missing from his holster. The gag in this scene actually makes little sense with ToD happening before RotLA.

B5Erik
06-10-12, 11:31 AM
While Sergio Leone's "Dollars" films can be called a trilogy due to stylistic connections, it's a loose trilogy at best and I don't think it's an actual trilogy following the exact same lead character in connected films.


Some arguments against it being an actual trilogy that stars the same lead character:

- The whole "Man With No Name" trilogy angle was invented by the American distributing studio after-the-fact in order to market the films. While they were being made, there was no sense that they were all following the exact same nameless character around. Clint Eastwood's character actually has different names in each one: Joe, Manco, and Blondie. Regardless of whether those are names or nicknames, it shows that he is a "Man With A Name" in each film.

- Lee Van Cleef's main character dies in The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly but he also plays a main character in For A Few Dollars More. So did he just come back from the dead and, in this new life, change his ways and switch from being the adversary of Eastwood's character to being his buddy? (And admitting that he is playing two different characters is an argument AGAINST it being an actual trilogy, not one for.)

- Storywise, nothing ties the films together, with the lead character played by Clint Eastwood needing to make money in both A Fistful of Dollars and A Few Dollars More but ending up extremely wealthy with a lot of gold at the end of The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly. If TGTBATU truly lead directly into AFOD, then what happened to all his gold? And why did his horse get replaced by a mule?

- Sergio Leone never intended for the films to be considered an actual trilogy. If the films are an auteur's vision, shouldn't the director's view of his films count more than the that of the marketing department of a studio distributor?


The only argument for it being an actual trilogy that's following the exact same lead character:

- Clint Eastwood wears the same clothes in all of them. And that's it: his clothes. (Yes, in The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, he does only get his distinctive poncho near the end of the film, but that - and that alone - is the extent of claiming that he is actually playing the exact same character. And I personally think his character is more of slight variations on a iconic theme than anything else.)


So, IMO, clothes alone are not enough to make something an actual trilogy.

I get what you're saying, but there is also the fact that he smokes the same thin cigars and has the exact same personality in each movie. He dresses the same, has the same personality, same mannerisms, same habits.

I think it works both ways. As a triology (no one besides Blondie/Joe/Manco knows his real name, so they just make up names in each story), and as stand alone movies.

Either way, they're great movies.

dhmac
06-10-12, 11:50 AM
I get what you're saying, but there is also the fact that he smokes the same thin cigars and has the exact same personality in each movie. He dresses the same, has the same personality, same mannerisms, same habits.

That's what I mean when I said Clint Eastwood's character in the films is really just slight variations on an iconic theme. The look and basic persona is something that Clint Eastwood himself came up with on the first film - which was just a Western remake of Yojimbo - and that they then just stuck with for its iconic nature in the following movies after that first movie was successful. But it was never intended to be the exact same character just having different adventures, which is why there is really nothing else tying the films together (which would've been easy for them to do if they wanted them all to be sequels and prequels).

Dr. DVD
06-10-12, 11:53 AM
I get what you're saying, but there is also the fact that he smokes the same thin cigars and has the exact same personality in each movie. He dresses the same, has the same personality, same mannerisms, same habits.



If that makes him the same character, then most of Arnold Schwarzenegger's characters have technically been The Terminator because of the phrase "I'll be back."

RotA is good, but it's a re-boot in a different timeline, same goes for Abrams' Star Trek.

GoldenJCJ
06-10-12, 12:40 PM
X-Men: First Class was close to being a great prequel until the wrap everything in a tidy little bow, pick-sides-for-dodge-ball ending they threw on.

I know Batman Begins is a clear cut Reboot but I'll throw it out as about as close to a great prequel as there is (assuming Godfather II doesn't count).

Solid Snake
06-10-12, 12:48 PM
...by that standard we might as well put RoTA too?

GoldenJCJ
06-10-12, 12:56 PM
As soon as I figure out what "RoTA" is I might consider it. ;)

inri222
06-10-12, 01:04 PM
Not great but as always Brando does not disappoint

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41wDeCAyuqL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

Mike86
06-10-12, 01:07 PM
Yeah, I love Batman Begins but it's really just a reboot. As for the topic I really liked X-Men: First Class a lot. Personally I felt it was better than any of the other X-Men films. I'd also mention the 2009 Star Trek but not sure if that counts as a prequel or more of a reboot.

Jules Winfield
06-10-12, 01:09 PM
X-Men: First Class was close to being a great prequel until the wrap everything in a tidy little bow, pick-sides-for-dodge-ball ending they threw on.

It was probably because they thought it would be a one shot deal. Just one past movie and then they'll set the rest of the movies in the present. I bet the makers wish they could go back and change it so that things could happen more organically now that a sequel is in the works.

Jules Winfield
06-10-12, 01:10 PM
I'd also mention the 2009 Star Trek but not sure if that counts as a prequel or more of a reboot.

Its like an alternate reality-quel since original Spock is in it.

GoldenJCJ
06-10-12, 02:54 PM
It was probably because they thought it would be a one shot deal. Just one past movie and then they'll set the rest of the movies in the present. I bet the makers wish they could go back and change it so that things could happen more organically now that a sequel is in the works.
I agree that that's probably why the filmmakers chose to end it the way they did. However, IMO, that ridiculous ending takes it from a "great" prequel to just a good one.

My Other Self
06-10-12, 03:02 PM
The fact that we're all just naming reboots shows that there is no such thing as a great prequel. They're usually just bad ideas.

Super X
06-10-12, 03:06 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Dumb_%26_Dumberer_film.jpg

Guru Askew
06-10-12, 03:27 PM
- Lee Van Cleef's main character dies in The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly but he also plays a main character in For A Few Dollars More. So did he just come back from the dead and, in this new life, change his ways and switch from being the adversary of Eastwood's character to being his buddy? (And admitting that he is playing two different characters is an argument AGAINST it being an actual trilogy, not one for.)

This is a pretty weak point. There are countless sequels and prequels where an actor is re-cast in another part.

dhmac
06-10-12, 03:50 PM
This is a pretty weak point. There are countless sequels and prequels where an actor is re-cast in another part.
There are? (And I wasn't even counting the minor roles in the 3 movies played by the same actor because there are some others, just the major starring roles.)

Dr. DVD
06-10-12, 05:54 PM
X-Men: First Class is only a prequel to Bryan Singer's X-Men movies. The events in it negate almost everything in Last Stand.

Boba Fett
06-10-12, 06:16 PM
If you want to be technical...

Fast Five is a prequel to Tokyo Drift and easily 1000x better.

Also, The Scorpion King is a prequel to the awful Mummy Returns and much better as well.

glassdragon
06-10-12, 06:18 PM
Dumb and Dumberer

just kidding


Dammit Super X

JumpCutz
06-10-12, 06:38 PM
The Scorpion King is a prequel to the awful Mummy Returns and much better as well.


Yet, The Scorpion King is still dreadful.

PenguinJoe
06-10-12, 06:48 PM
Back to the Future II (ish)?

Well going by this logic BTTF III was a prequel then because they went to the 1800s.

PenguinJoe
06-10-12, 06:53 PM
Speaking of prequels someone explain to me how Kyle Reese was like a 20 year old guy in Terminator Salvation and taking out like ten T-800s then is like a 40 year old man in the original Terminator which is supposed set only ten years into the future when he goes back into time. And also why did they only send back one T-800 when obviously the technology was there to send back a more efficient killing machine. I wish they didn't mess with The Terminator series after T2 it doesn't make any sense.

Groucho
06-10-12, 06:58 PM
Michael Biehn was 30 when he played Kyle Reese in the first Terminator, so it sounds like it fits with the timeline you set up perfectly.

PenguinJoe
06-12-12, 03:02 PM
Michael Biehn was 30 when he played Kyle Reese in the first Terminator, so it sounds like it fits with the timeline you set up perfectly.


Really maybe in the 80s people just looked older. I have friends in their 30s that look like their in their 20s and a lot of celebs I can't believe they're 30s. Either way the last two Terminator movies are crap.