How often is a sequal better than the original?

[upsidedownwalrus]

having just watched the fellowship and two towers again, i do think that the two towers has the better fight sequence, but the first half of the moive is just building up to it, and the ENTS where built up, but not much really happened at Isengard. Whereas with the fellowship at least there si a lot of necceasry character development, and the hobbiton sequence does help to make the black rider bit much more sinister.

I think that in the cinema versions, y ou are indeed correct, but in the EEs, the Two Towers is the best of the three; it was the one that benefited the most from an extended cut.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

ah, just rememberd that sequence in the art gallery... hmmm maybe itwasnt as good as i remembered. still rate it above the sequal. will have to watch them again to decide

Reno is right. Of the two burton batfilms, batmen returns is vastly superior, if you watch them again. Batman Returns also looks utterly gorgeous. Begins still pips it to the post of best batman film so far, though.

Off topic, but here is the first shot of the joker in the Dark Knight.

Dunno. Perhaps too trying to be heavy-metal video scary? I think Nicholson's Joker was way off the comics, but I was hoping they would come up with something nearer to the comics...

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Despite of what Lucas claimed later there was absolutely no talk of sequels when the first Star Wars film came out. Nobody thought it would be successful at the time and even if it had only been a moderate hit there would have been no Empire Strikes Back. In the 70's, before home video brought in extra revenue, only hugely successful films got sequels.

The same goes for The Godfather and it took 8 years for a sequel to Alien to come out, a film that was most definetely made to stand on it's own.

Yes, I think that's true, and provable by the fact that Episode IV is the only one that really works as a standalone film.

 

[Sigmund Fraud]

Adams Family values pisses on Adams Family.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Oh yeah, Meet the Fockers is vastly superior to Meet the Parents.

 

[Reno]

Adams Family values pisses on Adams Family.

Absolutely

I loved Joan Cusack as the homicidal nanny in that.

 

[dirtysanta]

Aliens better than Alien
Superman II beter than Superman
S

 

[vogonity]

Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey was, like, totally better than Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.

 

[T & P]

Predator 2 was better than Predator.

Have you got time to bleed?

 

[Dante]

good point, no cheesy chain gun in the sequel. Predator wins hands down. though the opening sequence in the coke lab was good, mothing can compare with macho chain guns

[wonder where i can get on]

 

[ohmyliver]

You have to be kidding - that's one of his worst ever performances - it makes me cringe, esp that crap about dancing with the devil in the pale moonlight. That film sucks so much.

I blame toploader

 

[billy_bob]

Yes, I think that's true, and provable by the fact that Episode IV is the only one that really works as a standalone film.

Well obviously, because it was the first one made. The others assume knowledge of what precedes them.

I still think there's a distinction to be made between franchises like Nightmare on Elm Street in which sequels are basically tweaked versions of the same film cashing in on the original idea for ever-decreasing returns, and trilogies (or more) where a story unfolds over the course of the whole series of films. The latter are less likely to be toss, generally speaking.

 

[Dante]

Harry Potter, Jaws, Rambo, do those count as franchises? Not sure about harry potter, but think that the frist jaws movie and rambo film where by far superieor. same with die hard

 

[Reno]

Harry Potter, Jaws, Rambo, do those count as franchises? Not sure about harry potter, but think that the frist jaws movie and rambo film where by far superieor. same with die hard

It doesn't have anything to do with good or bad or redundant sequels. Franchise is a financial term and like every business that has more than one branch, every film that generates a sequel is a franchise. Of course Jaws, Die Hard, etc were superior to their sequels. In each case the first film was made by top talent because it seemed like a good idea for a film, while the rest are made to generate money. Like Lord of the Rings the Harry Potter franchise is different because each is based on a different novel in an ongoing series. After a poor couple of films they got better when they started to take chances and got more talented directors involved.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Harry Potter, Jaws, Rambo, do those count as franchises? Not sure about harry potter, but think that the frist jaws movie and rambo film where by far superieor. same with die hard

Rambo is confusing. The trilogy goes like this.

1 First Blood
2 Rambo (First Blood part two)
3 Rambo 3 ????

Should it not be Rambo 2 first blood part 3?

Now they have firmed it up with 'John Rambo' (Rambo 3 first blood part 4)