Jump to content
Hondo's Bar

Sequels that made it


Recommended Posts

This is a topic to talk about a rareity in the film industry - a good sequel. Not just a good sequel, but one that lives up to or perhaps even surpasses its predecessor. Are there any? I think there are. A good sequel brings back everything we loved about a movie - characters, chemistry, settings - and eliminates anything we didn't like. I think there've been a few (James Bond movies don't count). Like, maybe...

 

Aliens

Terminator 2

Toy Story 2

Silence of the Lambs

The Empire Strikes Back

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

 

I know I can think of more, but I'm too tired, tonight...maybe tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the only thing that made Aliens works was that it was a completely DIFFERENT kind of film. It was an action film. the first one was a horror/suspense film. I think the first one is better, but the second is good in it's own right. They had this conversation in Scream 2 (they had a discussion about scary movie in the first one, so they have a discussion about sequels in the second one, pretty clever). I can only think of one more.

 

Army of Darkness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember we had a previous thread a long time ago where we talked about good sequels, or rather, at least I said all I had to say about them and everyone else just didn't care...  If I could dig that up I'd post it, I pretty much said all I care to say about sequels.

 

But yeah, there are some great sequels, arguably one of the best films of all time is a sequel, the godfather 2.  James cameron is great at sequels, as evidenced by aliens and T2.  I still have high hopes for true lies 2 if it's still being made...  A good sequelk doesn't necesarrily mean it's better than the orignial.  I don't think tower of doom or last crusade touched the quality of raiders of the lost ark, buit they are damned fine sequels.  I do know that to make a sequel, you need a better excuse than the fact that the first one made lots of money. :ill: :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good Call Jack, have to agree there (GOD is that a first??? ?)

SoF - Nah, it's not. It's just that when we disagree is always gets you so angry and me so defensive and unwilling to back down that it becomes the kind of spectical that overshadows the simple little agreements we do have. Out disagreement seem to be far more memorable than out agreements.

 

Junker - What's tower of doom?  :p ; ) You're right about a sequel not having to be better than it's predessor to be good, but I'm pretty sure that's what his thread is about, isn't it? Any thoughts on this?: I think Superman II was better than the first. Also if you go WAY back, i think most people say Bride of Frankenstein was better than the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, I loved Tower of Doom... Yeah, I agree Crusades wasn't as great as Raiders, but I thought it at least lived up to the idea, by adding Sean Connery's character.

 

And no, sequels don't have to be as good as the originals. I have all three Die Hards in my collection, but I know the second two weren't nearly as good as the first (though the third wasn't so bad). Doesn't mean I don't enjoy watching them. But, yeah, 's not what the thread's about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right... that has a lot to do with sequels... so...  to get back on track Drunken Master 2 is a hundred times better than drunken master 1 and is usually considered jackie chan's best movie.  Kung foo movies dont have problems with bad sequels, usually sequels are bad because you ruin the plot but if there is no plot to begin with, you're in the clear!  Case in point better tomorrow 2, fucking great movie, plot, nonexistant!  Same with part 3.  No plot, no problem.  

 

  Though some sequels dont come out so well, I can surely appreciate the work put into them.  The writers of the planet of the apes series were the hardest working bastards in show business...   they blew up the goddamned planet in one script for the sole purpose of never having to write another  ha!  child's play!  They demanded another sequel, so they just wrote around that little detail.  And it came out fairly well, I think.  I mean, as well as it's gonna come out when you have some writers ending each script more definitively than the next, only to have to write another.  The blair witch  sequel had a very good concept, a great script I dare say... too bad the movie still sucked, I think that one almost made it.  After the success of the first movie a group goes into the forest to do a documentary and freaky shit happens, lots of good ideas, too bad it sucked.  Sometimes it's cool to see them write a sequel to a movie that was very obviously not written with one in mind just to see where the writers go with it.

 

Oh, and on somewhat related sequel news, Frant Darabont (Shawshank redemption, green mile, did some writing on saving private ryan) the writer for Indy Iv says that the story will be set in the 50's because indy's older so there will be no nazis, but he assured the villains will be cool in some interviews.  I think this one's definately looking up.  

 

Wrote quite a bit... but this is a decent topic!  Why must it all spiral downward into posts worthy of blargh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the story will be set in the 50's because indy's older so there will be no nazis, but he assured the villains will be cool in some interviews.

the Fifties! Looks like it's Communist Russia's time to shine in an Indy flick!

 

I hear Indy IV has Indy's son in it, and i think Connery is back too (but I'm not as sure about that), so three generations of Joneses! I'm curious as to see who'll play that part. Indy has IV pretty good movie to look up to. If can't be just a decent film and then still be better than that one like for Batman sequels (no matter what, they'll always be able to say 'at least it was better than B&R').

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't think they've gotten Connery to agree to the part, yet. I don't even think they've asked, yet. As for Indy's son. That'll be the most sought after part for up-and-coming actors since Anakin. If they wanted a bigger name, my suggestion would be Josh Hartnett.

 

And speaking of movies built for sequels, what about the Alien series? I think the biggest requirement for directing an Alien sequel was that you had to promise to fuck up the last director's ending as much as possible. I mean, in Alien, she escapes the alien and heads back to earth, but in the sequel, oh no, no she doesn't, she drifts out there for 57 years instead! At the end of Aliens, she flees the planet with friends, but in Alien3 she crashes and all her friends die. Well, that sucks. And in Alien3 she kills herself to save the world, but in Alien 4, oh no, Ripley, we won't even let you do that! We're gonna clone you! I can hear Ridley Scott's exasperated sighs all the way over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, only great directors can touch alien, but that doesnt matter.  All is lost now, the alien franchise is cursed!  I guess I can see fincher's failure, his debut and all, you shouldn't debut on such a huge blockbuster movie, he got edited, and generally fucked left and right, and he just wasn't very experienced.  Now jean-pierre jeunet... what the fuck was htis man doing directing an alien movie in the first place?  I want to know who was the fucking genius that suggested he direct one.  "City of lost children was sci-fi.... shit, this guy could do an alien movie!  I mean, it's pretty much the same thing, right?"

 

It sucks too, because alien seems like the kind of franchise that would be fun for directors to take turns doing, and you'd get to see what's essentially the same story, told in a bunch of different ways.  Sort of like mission impossible, if they keep going the way it looks like they're going.  I think that's a great approach to a sequel.  Tell the same story over and over, but just let it be a sort of playground for writers and directors to have fun with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Die Hard with a Vengence was cool. "You know what your problem is? You're racist." "I'm what?" "Yeah, that's right. You don't like me cause I'm white." "I don't like you cause you're gonna get me killed!" As far as Indy 4's Indy Jr casting. I wonder if they'll written the script for a certain age and cast based on that, or if they'll cast whoever they want for whatever purposes and they written the script around his age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You interfered with a well-laid plan." "Yeah? Well you can take your well-laid plan and stick up your well-laid ass."

Yeah, I liked that one, too. I liked it because it was a lot different from the first one, whereas the second tried too hard to match the first. Did anyone else think the original Die Hard often seemed like some kinda McGuyver: the Movie? The third was a standard buddy cop movie. Actually, that makes sense because the original version of the script was supposed to be made into a Lethal Weapon sequel, until they decided to re-write it to suit Die Hard.

 

And, oh yeah, Callista Flockhart is in Indy 4 (sigh).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was an extention of the first one. It was more of the same. The second one couldn't stand on its own because so many of the jokes were direct references to the first movie. If you can get passed that, it is a great movie, but the first one wins over the second in my book for originality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...