Hatred for sequels.

[thejboy88]

Hi everyone.

As you all know, there are many cases in the movie industry, or indeed any form of media these days, there people are constantly saying that sequels, prequels, spin-offs or even the so-called "midquels" are never as good as the original.

To a large extent, I agree with them. Notable examples include the ever decreasing Star Wars films. While I don't hate them as much as some people, I just don't think they held a candle to the originals. Many seem to agree with me on that point. Remakes, like the recent Michael Bay Transformers films also seem to suffer from this.

Many of these issues either stem from directors taking directions with the films they think will work but don't, or a complete lack of understanding for what made the originals great.

However, while I acknowledge people's dislike for continuing franchises that decline after a while, there are some cases or lines of though which just astound me.

The most notorious one being this statement:

"These new films are so terrible that they are just ruining the original for me."

That way of thinking just seems ridiculous to me. Yes I know that some sequels are just horiffic, like the post-original Highlander films. But to say that the quality of those films should have some bearing on the like or dislike of the original just seems idiotic to me.

No don't get me wrong, I'm not calling these people idiots, but to me at least, newer films do not change the way I feel about the originals. The newer star wars films may lack the quality of the original to me but that does not mean the originals are now somehow less good as a result.

Each film is good or bad depending on what you like in a film, but no film, no matter HOW bad it is, can or should affect how you like other films of that franchise.

 

[Geekosaurus]

The original Star Wars trilogy and the Bourne trilogy still hold the blueprint for the perfect trilogy. George Lucas almost messed that up with the prequels (but the fact they they can stand alone as their own trilogy sort of helps) and it looks like they're going to destroy Bourne too.

A sequel doesn't become a bad film just because it's a sequel. It becomes a bad film because, usually, it's not as good as the first.

 

[Casual Shinji]

What a coincidence; I just saw Predators.

The perfect example of what a sequel should never do; try to be as much like the original movie as possible.

Dear God, the amount of references to the original was comical.

 

[CrustyOatmeal]

i find alot of people dont like sequels because they dont have the same flare as the original. original games/ movies intorduce you to a new world for the first time and so everything amazed you (imagine when you first saw avatar) but sequels have trouble because they have to stay tied to the original but at the same time they have to be unique. for example look at any shooter sequel, they have to progress the story, add new character developments, plot twists, and replace majority of the weapons in your game. you can only re-imagine a machine gun so many times before people realize they are the same thing.

i guess what im trying to say is i think sequels have a tougher time than original series because they have to ride a fine line between being too original and essentially making a new IP which pisses off hardcore fans or being to unoriginal and not impressing any new possible consumers thus getting your title stuck

 

[Crazy_Dude]

What a coincidence; I just saw Predators.

The perfect example of what a sequel should never do; try to be as much like the original movie as possible.

Dear God, the amount of references to the original was comical.

Agreed Predators was 90% rehash of Predator together with the whole soundtrack and suddenly with the old predator suiting up again they use some lame ass techno rock. Just when the soundtrack would have fitted perfectly they do it wrong.

Anyways some sequels seem better then the original. (See Aliens and Terminator 2) Others just are complete bullshit and overkill on the action aka see matrix 2. But sequels can be better then the originals.

 

[VanityGirl]

If people don't like sequels, then the original Star Wars trilogy would not have been such a success. In my opinion, Star Wars V was infinitly better than IV. In this case, the sequel was better than the first.

How about The Mummy movie? The second was once again, in my opinion, better than the first. (The third sucked though.)

 

[Casual Shinji]

Anyways some sequels seem better then the original. (See Aliens and Terminator 2) Others just are complete bullshit and overkill on the action aka see matrix 2. But sequels can be better then the originals.

I wouldn't call Aliens better then the original, they're very different movies in that regard.

But that's what makes it a good sequel. I'm not the biggest Aliens fan myself, but I appreciate it for not rehashing the first movie. Whether it was deliberate or not, the sequel went in a completely different direction, showing us a different side of the original concept.

Too bad they didn't - or couldn't - do the same thing with Predator.