What I'm referring to is going back and making a direct sequel to a film in the franchise that ignores any existing sequels that followed it.

Some examples out there... Halloween H20 picks up after Halloween 2, pretty much ignoring the events of Halloween 4-6. And Superman Returns was written as a direct continuation of Superman 2 (despite the cast and era change), ignoring 3 and 4. I understand the new Universal Soldier movie does this as well.

For me, I'd love to see a new direct sequel to Aliens that ignores Alien 3 and 4. Don't get me wrong, I like Alien 3 and don't want to wipe it off the face of existence or anything. But I would love to see a continuation of Cameron's path, a "30 years later" type story with a grown-up Newt and an older Ripley and Hicks, without Newt and Hicks biting it and without the Ripley rebirth nonsense. A "what if", so to speak.

Escape from New York

There was so much potential for the Plissken character, and what does Carpenter do? He puts him in the exact same film, but now it's in LA. I could come up with a thousand different storylines I'd rather have seen.

Robocop

James Cameron's Alien III.

I would have liked to have seen Roy Scheider come out of the Jaws the Revenge abyss and kill another shark.

AGREED! An alternate universe where Hicks and Newt didn't have to die!

X-Men 3 and Wolverine. Next movie needs to start after the events of X2.

It has taken me over a decade to accept and appreciate Fincher's Alien III, but I'd love a Cameron sequel. I'd love it hard.

Ok, what does 'retcon' stand for? I get the concept of the thread, but that particular word?

The Matrix. Somehow, a much better sequel than the lame followups to the excellent original could have been done.

Retroactive Continuity

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RetCon

It's a comics term that derives from retroactively changing continuity. This happens when a story is told that establishes something different from what was previously shown to have taken place. The best example I know of is George Lucas. In the From "Star Wars" to "Jedi" documentary, it's pretty clear that the Skywalker family relationships were made up as he went along, but in the Prequel era, it became fashionable for him to insist this was all elaborately and intricately planned back in the early 1970s.

Speed.

The Godfather.

Got it guys, thanks! I'd never heard of that term and for some reason it was bugging me because it felt like I should've.

Makes sense.

Terminator 3

Superman 3 & 4

In the same vein, I vote for Spider-Man 3. We needed a proper capper to Raimi's trilogy, one that brings the character arcs to their logical end and makes use of the build-up thus far. Curt Conner as the Lizard, I'm looking at you.

Remo Williams?

Jurassic Park

/\ Is Buckaroo Banzai part of a franchise that I do not know of?

I could do with a new X-Men 3, I hated that they killed everybody off, I won't even buy that movie nor do I ever want to see it again, hated it! X-Men 1 & 2 were great, give us a new X-Men 3. -kd5-

Highlander, maybe. Maybe a REAL Police Academy 5 with Steve Gutenberg. I'd also like to see a decent followup to Fellowship of the Ring rather than the two crappy sequels they came up with.

a failed franchise that never materialized.

guess not. just thought a sequel would have been cool.

I've never read the books, so if this is a "Peter Jackson didn't include enough source material" thing, I don't get it. Otherwise, Flickchart has taught me that my favorite of the trilogy is The Two Towers and it's not even close. Fellowship is good, yes, but it's still ultimately just a very, very long first act. Return of the King has a lot of payoff, but then it descends into that hour long montage of endings that never wants to end. Two Towers is pretty much just an all-out epic battle from start to finish and while the characters may not grow much, I find it rewarding for just being what it is.