Release List Reviews Shop Join News DVD Giveaways Video Games Advertise
DVD Reviews | Theatrical Reviews | Price Search Buy Stuff Here
DVD Talk
DVD Reviews DVD Talk Headlines HD Reviews

Add to My Yahoo! - RSS 2.0 - RSS 2.0 - DVD Talk Podcast RSS -

Go Back   DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Thread Tools
Old 12-07-02, 01:34 AM   #1
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mizzou
Posts: 82
Anyone Else Think Sequels Arent So Bad?

Ok, Ive been looking at all of these threads about sequels and all the straight-to-dvd disney sequels that are coming out, and I have to ask "Who Cares?". If they make a sequel, they make a sequel. Sure, I would prefer that Disney would release more creative efforts than Cinderella II, but I mean, It doesnt bother me directly and it doesnt make me hate the first movie more or anything.
For example, Theres a little movie called The Exorcist. You may have heard of it. When the horribly bad sequel came out, many people said that it would ruin the first film. Well, I dont know about you but when I look back at The Exorcist, The sequel doesnt even really come to mind. Now had the sequel been better and more succesfull, we would probably have 10 exorcist movies (A LA Friday the 13th).
In the end, sequels dont bother me because most of the time, its interesting seeing characters that we know and love in their next adventures (Who doesnt like seeing James Bond over and over again in 20+ films!?). And besides, pretty much everyone on those threads complain about sequels being made to good movies... But they end up seeing them. If you hate the fact that there is a sequel, DONT SEE IT! If you see it, youre just giving the companies more money to make another one! Remember, sequels are made for the money, almost never for the art of continuing a franchise! And by giving them money you are endorsing their sequel-making behavior.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 01:56 AM   #2
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,076

Great post. I honestly don't care if a sequel is bad. I mean hell, it's a hit and miss. And considering disney is targetting the younger audiance does it really matter aslong as the kids enjoy the film?

If you don't like it. don't buy it. maybe that will make disney choose better movies to make
OTHER FORUM TEAM 7 leaderI will not say them here nor there. I will not say them anywhere. I will not say those Words you twit. I will not, will not sayI quit!
Leaving a dark wet stain where your brain used to be?
The bank is worth the risk
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 02:01 AM   #3
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,462
i don't mind sequels most of the time. If i liked the first movie..then I will check them out. I won't buy them just to complete a series though if they are bad.
my wonderful DVD collection
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 04:25 AM   #4
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 2,202
Most sequels are not as good as the original..Usually there done to make more $$$ as oppose to trying to improve on the original story..

There are excpetions of course:

1) Aliens was better than the original IMO

2)Godfather II was as good if not better than part I
Samsung HL-T6187S
Sony BDP-S550, VQM-1000 (Region Free)
Polk Audio RM6750's
Denon AVR-788 7.1 Set Up

387 Blu-Rays
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 04:47 AM   #5
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Under a pile of unwatched dvds
Posts: 1,059
I think Aliens is probably the best sequel that I have ever seen, even better than the first one. You can probably say that about Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan.
Movies titles on Blu: 1,125
5 line max signatures allowed
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 06:51 AM   #6
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ferndale, MI
Posts: 5,243
Some sequels are good and some are bad. A rare few are better than their originals. Yes they're usually made to cash in on the originals success but if a sequel completely sucks, I don't hold it against the original (I still watch Alien and Aliens despite my hatred for Alien 3 & Resurrection).
My film collection
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 07:21 AM   #7
DVD Talk Hero
TomOpus's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 30,424
I don't think sequels are that bad. I think most perceive sequels as 'bad' if they really loved the original. I remember how much I really disliked Grease 2 but I've grown to like it and it's not really that bad.

Now the Alien thing... IMO, I don't think one should be compared to the other. Alien I consider 'horror' and was I was totally transfixed by that movie. Not many have done that to me. Aliens I would consider an all-out 'action' movie and was very well made.

I'm sure we'll continue the sequel discussion when BTTF Trilogy is released in 10 days.
"Pear Pimples for Hairy Fishnuts!"

My So-Called DVD Life (Profiler),A Fistful of Discs (DVDAf)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 07:29 AM   #8
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,129
Originally posted by lisadoris
Some sequels are good and some are bad. A rare few are better than their originals. Yes they're usually made to cash in on the originals success but if a sequel completely sucks, I don't hold it against the original (I still watch Alien and Aliens despite my hatred for Alien 3 & Resurrection).
Exactly, Toy Story 2 I think was better then Toy Story, only because it focused on the story of the characters we learned about before.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 08:18 AM   #9
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Texas, our Texas! All hail the mighty state!
Posts: 12,842
Moving to Movie Talk.
Mike's Collection

They stompled all over me. - Thunderball
Hippies take things from all cultures and make it suck. - kvrdave
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 09:39 AM   #10
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: May 1999
Location: new england
Posts: 8,173
Same here. There are times when I discuss with friends and say, oh geez, they're making a sequel. In the grand scheme of things, how does that really affect me?

I agree with the sentiment that Aliens was better than Alien. Which doesn't take a way from the fact that Alien was still a good movie. I also despise the third and fourth in that series and will never own themon DVD.

Uhhhh, it really wasn't too hard to make a better movie than Star Trek the Motion Sickness. But I agree ST 2 rocked. But how many of the ones that followed had that same level of storytelling to it?
I have multiple personalities and none of them like you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 12:34 PM   #11
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,463
Bad sequels certainly don't hurt the first movie, because each movie is judged in its own right.

However, it is nice to have one vision or overall thought about a story and it's concept. A sequel attempts to "add" to the overall concept and complete story.

I mean take a look at E.T. Everyone has a vision of E.T. - whether you liked it or not. Had a sequel come out - and surely it wouldn't have worked - that overall vision would be altered.

However, Empire Strikes Back - and to a lesser degree - Jedi - GREATLY added to the overall "Star Wars" story and concept.

Sometimes sequels do work well (Star Wars, Superman II, Godfather II, although Godfather III was a failure, etc.).

Last edited by DavidH; 12-07-02 at 12:36 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 01:34 PM   #12
DVD Talk Reviewer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 3,350
Yeah, they never hurt the first film. Sequals don't bother me because I can always appreciate what the mastermind behind it all is trying to do with a movie. A lot of complaints towards Halloween H20 for example...sure not nearly as good as the older ones...but...they were going for the whole 'jamie lee vs michael myers' deal and that's what they accomplished. You can't expect the same greatness all the time. But it doens't mean that sequals are bad in the least. There are very very very few movies out there that I simply just don't like. I think the worst sequal ever was probaly Mortal Kombat Annihilation. That was just really really wrong. But other movies, that had sequals that weren't as good...were still GOOD, some better...BETTER: Aliens, Terminator 2, Godfather 2 (maybe) GOOD, DOESNT RUIN THE FIRST FILM: American Pie 2, Ace Ventura 2, Blade II, Crow City Of Angels, Escape From LA, Die Hard With A Vengeance, Evil Dead 2, Army Of Darkness, and I'm sure The Two Towers, and the new Harry Potter movie.... the list can go on. Bottom line is, sequals aren't as bad as people make them out to be
Vizio M55-D0 (2016) UHD TV, Sony STR-DN1070 Receiver, Sony UBP-X800 UHD Player
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 02:33 PM   #13
DVD Talk Hero
Josh-da-man's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Bible Belt
Posts: 26,942
Is there a difference between sequels and parts of a series?

Are the James Bond and Star Trek movies actually "sequels" or are they parts of a series?

I would go so far as to say that there's a difference between a sequels and series.

A "sequel" simply rehashes characters and/or plot elements: Friday the 13th, Jaws, most horror movies or comedies.

A "series" either expands on the mythology in a meaningful way -- Aliens, Empire Strikes Back, Godfather -- or was actually pre-planned like The Two Towers. I'd say that films based on series of books, like James Bond, would count as well.

Of course, on could argue that the difference between "sequels" and "series" is how the well the sequels turned out. If it's good, it's part of a series, if it's bad, it's a sequel.
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."

-- Lucius Annaeus Seneca
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 04:13 PM   #14
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 733
In theory i have no problem with sequels. I mean, if i loved the story and characters in a movie, why wouldn't i want to see more of them (provided the story lends itself to a sequel)?

In practice however, i generally assume most sequels will suck. That, however, is a result of poor execution and not because sequels are inherently bad.
My dvds
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 04:47 PM   #15
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 7,758
sequels for the most part, are just not going to do very well...they are at a huge disadvantage since the first one already has set the stage and told the story. it was already unique so that factor is gone.

people will almost always compare it to the first, thus making it very difficult to surpass...and thus making it not as good in most peoples eyes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 05:48 PM   #16
DVD Talk Legend
Goat3001's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 16,389
IMO, most of the time sequals aren't as good as the original. Most of the time I won't bother unless I really liked the first one. But if I do see it, and not like it, it never cheapens the original.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 09:53 PM   #17
Uber Member
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Overlooking Pearl Harbor
Posts: 16,232
Most sequels aren't that good. That's part of why people tend to roll their eyes when they hear that a movie they liked is going to have a sequel.

I do think, however, that sequels can have a generally negative consequence in the sense that rather than repackaging a successful movie (which they rarely succeed at), it would be better to spend the money on developing a new movie that, simply by not being a sequel, would probably have a better chance of entertaining us.

My DVDs and HT
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 11:29 PM   #18
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 10,614
Not really, but it also depends on what movie they are doing a sequel on *cough* Speed *cough*
I was dyslexic as a child...and I wrote about it everyday in my dairy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-02, 11:59 PM   #19
DVD Talk Legend
DeputyDave's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,081
If I really liked a movie, a sequel gives me chance to spend time in that world again. IF a sequel is just plain bad, then its not that it should never have been made... more like it should never have been watched.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-02, 12:02 AM   #20
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: KS
Posts: 3,194
No, sequels aren't bad by themselves and they don't ruin the original work if they are bad. Example for me is Scream. Loved the first one, liked the 2nd one until the end, 3rd one sucked IMHO. Still, I think the original Scream is one of my favorite movies of all time. I think the biggest thing is that when there is a big hit, people expect the sequel to live up to the original which is usually hard to do.

Sequels better than the original:
Toy Story 2
Terminator 2
Alien 2
Army of Darkness (3rd of a series)
Austin Powers 2 and 3
Killing in the Name Of

That which you don't understand, you can make mean anything.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-02, 02:35 AM   #21
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Columbia, MD, USA
Posts: 11,108
I'd agree with pretty much what's been said. Sequels and Re-makes for that matter are fine by me. Not to say I'm rushing out to see them, but it people want to make movie X, so be it.

I make think it's a stupid idea to remake Psycho, but that just means I won't go and see it. Obviously some stories, like Hamlet have been done over and over.

As for sequels, I often enjoy seeing a 2nd movie just to enjoy the characters. Most don't hold a candle to the original, but that's okay. Doing a sequel isn't easy. You have to maintian a certain likeness to the original or the fans won't like it, and yet there are others that want some diffferent. Yo have to mix the two and even add something more just to get to the level of the first. And one good idea is tough to top with a better one.

But I fully endorse people trying.
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-02, 04:02 AM   #22
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 9,975
It's funny, I love the first two Jurassic Park films, hate the 3rd one, and it doesn't bother me. I can just pretend the movies ended there.

However, on TV shows, when I like one season then hate the next, I find it very hard to ignore... I can't just pretend the show ended there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-02, 01:56 PM   #23
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mizzou
Posts: 82
I agree about the tv show thing, they are very different than sequels for some reason. For example, when Seinfeld had its really bad last season, It almost casted a shadow over the whole series. Almost.
I think the one example to this is the show 24, which each season seems like one big long movie so therefore if the second season is bad, you can say "well, the first season is great".
Fortunately, thats not the case, the second season just ROCKS!
This almost makes me want to start a tv show thread somewhere.... heh.
And I totally disagree with the person that said the second two austin powers movies were better. The first one actually had a good plot: 60s guy comes to the 90s. That was the funny part about the movie, the 60s formula being made fun of in a 90s context. But in the sequel, he just went back to the 60s and rehashed all of the same jokes from the first one. (granted, there were some funny scenes in both of the sequels). And the third just seemed like a phony attempt to cash in on the franchise (although the phony attempt paid off).

I dunno, thats just my opinion, I could be wrong.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-02, 04:11 PM   #24
wendersfan's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Nuova Repubblica di SalÚ
Posts: 31,828
Aliens better than Alien? Gimme a break!


I cannot believe all you people saying Aliens was better than Alien... Alien was a brilliant piece of work. It was dark, suspenseful, thoughtful, scary, and had one of the most amazing casts ever - Harry Dean Stanton and Yaphet Kotto in supporting roles? Wow. Aliens, OTOH, was just another James Cameron retardo-action extravaganza. Who's got the biggest gun? Who can make the loudest explosion? Who can make the funniest wisecrack?


Usually sequels are inferior because the try to recreate the feel and attitude of the original in an attempt to cash-in on the popularity of their predecessor. Unfortunately, making blanket statements that sequels are ALWAYS inferior is a good way to insure you're gonna be taken down a notch.
"Fifth Element may be as dumb and artless as Johnny Mnemonic, but since a frenchman made it it must be ART!" -Pants
"...I think it's a low blow to draw attention to wendersfan's drunken state. " - dork
"Just because their victims are still alive doesn't mean they didn't commit murder." - grundle
"You concentrate on the sad wanna be hooliganism and let us worry about the actual soccer." - rocketsauce (final score: Columbus 2-Chicago 1)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-02, 04:14 PM   #25
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,213
I like sequels.... I particularly like really bad sequels.

It's kinda like I don't like walking away from the dinner table hungry.

Take The Godfather for instance... After 1, I was like "woo hoo... this is great... give me more"... After 2, I was like "Awsome... can't wait for part 3."

After part 3, I was like "OK... that's enough... no dessert for me".
  Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:04 PM.

Copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0