Which of These Critically Maligned Sequels Do You Feel Improves Upon the Original?
 

Obviously, I could have listed several other options (I had worked up a page a mile long, in fact), but I'm limited to ten options, so I went with the ones with the most likely possibility of living up to the thread title. For myself, I went with BACK TO THE FUTURE, PART II which, for me, improves upon the original in almost every capacity--it's funnier, much more frenetic, denser in plot mechanics, just a riot from start to finish...I'm forever perplexed at the critical and popular disregard in which it is held.

BTTF II for me as well, followed closely by GB2

You need a "none of the above" option -- I'd click it. I just don't think any of those improved upon the originals. Doesn't mean I don't like them, just means they weren't as good.

I enjoyed many of the films on that list, but none of them improve on their originals, IMO.

das

I haven't seen all of those series, but of the ones I have, I also do not feel than any improved on the original.

I voted for M:I 2 as I felt it improved upon the original (I think it received better reviews as well).

Another vote for "none of the above"... in fact, some of these are poor choices? Spider-Man 2 would be better than listing GB 2 of all things, for example.

Well, neither was particularly well-regarded but, according to rottentomatoes.com, the first film registered 66% positive reviews while the sequel only garnered 57%. The box office for the sequel did surpass the original, so perhaps I should have gone with a different title selection; however, I believe that appreciation for the original has slowly begun to improve with time, whereas I'm the only person I've ever met who enjoys the sequel (not as much as the first, though) so I'd still be curious to encounter people who enjoy John Woo's take on the franchise over DePalma's...

Why would I list SPIDER-MAN 2, when it was considered an improvement over the original by both critics and audiences alike? Perhaps you should re-read the thread title...

I was tempted to vote for Back to the Future and qualify it by saying only II, not III, surpassed the developments and themes of the original. But the original Back to the Future and Part II are far too different from one another to really effect each film's own particular quality. The original uses nostalgia and sentimentality to propel the plot, where the time travel is a means to an end. Part II revels in plot convolutions and uses the narrative to amplify the non-linear timelines and characterizations. Part II is about time travel and the original is about a son gaining respect for his father.

My point is, Part II does not really inform any aspect of the original, so I can't say it improved my viewing of Part I.

Part III simply culls from the 2 previous films to create an inferior product on all ends (though the allusions to Westerns are amusing).

So I voted for the Matrix sequels because 1) the second and third film are as different from the original as they are from one another 2) the self-contained world in The (original) Matrix gains greater breadth by the labrynthine hierarchies and societies portrayed and alluded to in Reloaded and Revolutions.

I find all three films silly, but the sequels have a much greater scope, visually and stylistically, than the first.

I went with M:I 2 though I think my answer could change depending on what direction the third film goes. MI2 cranked up the action a notch and if that is the direction the franchise is headed then it was an "improvement" over the first (though I do enjoy the original). If the third film goes back to the team work aspect and aims for more character development then I'd be inclined to characterize the sequel as a diversion in the road rather than an improvement.

I daresay you may be over-thinking my query--I'm simply asking which sequel (if any) you think is a more enjoyable overall movie-watching experience than the original series entry, regardless of how it informs or fails to inform that original.

I thought Predator 2 was really good, in an over-the-top, non-stop action, 80's movie kind of way. You just can't make a movie like that anymore, where gangbangers are snorting coke while shooting at cops, only to be skinned alive by an alien a few minutes later, and that's just in the first 10 minutes.

I'd have to say Mission Impossible 2. It's not great, but it's a good popcorn flick, where as I though the first one was kind of boring.

The only film on that list that i would vote for is BTF II.

Agreed.

My original statement is still valid.

Back to the Future Parts I and II are both equally enjoyable (if inherently different) experiences. Hence my not voting for them.

And Reloaded and Revolutions are much more interesting in many regards than their predecessor. That the two sequels actually persuaded me to cool my contempt of the original only increases my appreciation of them.

How could you forget the great Lethal Weapon 2?

That is far better than the original in every way. While the original is a good film,it is to cliched and by the numbers with other buddy cop/detective films. ie-the plot and situations seem right out of any cop drama on tv,as well as countless other cop films(especially 80's cop stuff).

So while it may have been 'fresh' when it was released,it does'nt completely hold up after all the countless spinoffs.


Meanwhile part 2 pulls no punches and goes for the jugular. It has some terrific charecters and dialogue,along with some spectacular action set pieces that really grip you.


I also would have to say Psycho II is on par with the greatness of the original. A taunt truly suspensful chiller that delivers on all accounts. While this does get some good reviews,most critics are lukewarm with ** star ratings since they just 'can't' admit to finding it as good,if not better than a Hitchcock film.

I thought MI2 was better than the original. I simply didn't like the first one much at all.

Fair enough, but your original post doesn't seem to indicate such...

Because it wasn't a critical or audience disappointment...again, read the thread title.

Now, that would qualify; however, again, I only had ten selection options, and I'd have to eat my shoe if more than one person was willing to admit they love PSYCHO II over Hitchcock's classic original, so I chose to go with other choices...

None of the above.

None. The only from that list that comes close to the original IMO would be <i>Predator 2</i>

Back to the Future Part 2, I actually like it better than the original. What's up with Mission Impossible 2 winning? That was like one of the all time worst movies ever. I bought it only for the MTV Ben Stiller skit.

M:I2 2as somthing of a love hate movie.

Some people like myself thought it was a decent mindless action flick, others loathe it.

Like I said, it's not great but I didn't care for the first one much at all, so I easily like the sequel more.