5punk

Common thinking is that the original is usually better than the sequel in cinema, but I beg to differ. I reckon I could open up a whole can of <s>film</s> worms by saying it though, so I did. Here are some sequels I think are better than the originals:

Predator 2
Characters are deeper, setting is more interesting, and it has that bit with the trophy cabinet in the spaceship with the Alien skull in. The original just had Arnie and a minigun.

Gremlins 2
A bit closer than the Predators, but the brain Gremlin was brilliant and the antics just seemed that little bit funnier to me in the setting of the 80s corporation.

Mad Max 2
The original was good, bit this had the budget and inspired countless post apocalyptic settings. There's always a contestant in those singing reality TV shows who look like the kid with the boomerang too. Weird.

I'd disagree on Predator 2, as I think the plot is a bit sillier, and the first was a supreme view on the hunter becoming the hunted and the reality of the situation dawning on Arnie and Co.

I also prefer MaxMax 1, mainly because it's quite a gritty revenge story in the latter half.

Although, to further the list, I'll raise you Aliens. I prefer it to the original, especially the Directors Cut, that's brilliant.

Terminator 2 is a better film that the original, but only just considering the first is very good as well.

And Star Trek 2: Wrath of Kahhhhhhhhhhnn! is in a totally different league to the original Star Trek film.

Still on a sci-fi theme. The original Star Wars trilogy, Empire Strikes back is the best.

I too consider the original Predator to be the superior. Neither are masterpieces, but the sequel seems a more ridiculous. Although both are enjoyable.

I'll throw the recent Batman films in the hat. Possibly even the Keaton ones as well.

I'll park my botty on the fence with this one. Strict sequels are actually quite hard to find, trilogies, unrelated films with a 2 (3, 4, 5, etc) added on are plenty, but are they sequels? What about re-imaginings? Get your damn stinking hands off me you damn dirty marky mark!


Aliens is better, but no real sequel to alien given it's complete change in direction, style etc.

I think predator was better than 2, but enjoy them both as absurdities.

Die hard. I love the first one, but by three with samuel motherfucking L!!, they are gritty and polished all at the same time, quality no brainer flicks.

Universal soldier - good, unisol 2 - utter pish.

Hostel - really bad, hostel 2 - even worse.

Blues brothers versus blues brothers 2000, no contest really.

The bourne films, first one is aces, don't much care for the second, third one I quite liked.

Star wars trilogy, first one pisses over the second one. Out the new trilogy, the third is probably the last shit, despite the NOOOOOO of it all.

Empire strikes back is best of the old trilogy. ROTJ is probably best for the drinking game though.

I can agree with Alien/Aliens and Star Wars/Empire Strikes Back. The third Die Hard was rubbish though.

Dawn of the Dead I prefer to Night of the Living Dead, but only because Dawn had a bit of a sense of humour and created the definitive modern zombie.

EDIT: Evil Dead 2. A reimagining of the original but a deliberate and successful improvement.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khaaaan is the best in the series, and certainly better than the snorefest of the first.

The Lord of the Rings films got incrementally better and The Dark Knight is superior to Batman Begins.

Can't agree on Terminator or Alien - if you ignore the dodgy effects, the originals had cracking stories, and no annoying kid thrust into the story.

I secretly prefer Predator 2, secretly because, well..Danny Glover.

Actors-wise, I think Clint Eastwood, Charles Bronson and Marlon Brando got better with their recurring characters, but the plots didn't always improve.

Aliens vs Predator: Requiem, but this only wins on the grounds that Aliens vs Predator was fucking terrible.

Indiana Jones maybe? They always seemed like a steady stream of mediocre to me.

I'd agree with the new Batman series, first one just seemed to be building up to something. Which it was.

See I look more at trilogies... and I tend to think the 2nd one often is the least strong.

Like Austin Powers, Bourne movies, Oceans 11-13, Transporter, Friday. Exceptions are terminator and Back to the future, tales from the crypt.... although BttF2 pissed me off with the cliffhanger ending.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_trilogies

Can't think of too many sequels..

Wayne's world 2 sucks, 28weeks Later was good, Ringu 2 sucked, Dumb and dumberer.. WTF fail, Clerks 2 good, Rush Hour 2 not bad, Ghostbusters 2 ehhh ok. I agree with Pants about Gremlins and Predator.

I think most trilogies nowadays are designed to be made that way, so the middle one is kind of a filler between establishing the characters in the first and the grand finale in the third. Star Wars pulled it off because Empire was the darkest of the three films, setting the fall from which the Rebels would rise. Mind you, I think LotR and The Matrix both did the same with mixed results.

The old sequels tended to just be a succesful film that was being milked by increasingly cheap production teams, so each iteration became cheesier and less convincing. The ones that break the trend are nice though.

punkchuck wrote:Clerks 2 good,

watchable enough, but nothing on the original.

.

As far as I am concerned, remakes can fuck off die in a fire

They should make innovative new movies instead of milking old ones for the sake of monies

Also good sequel: Karate Kid II

fabyak wrote:As far as I am concerned, remakes can fuck off die in a fire

They should make innovative new movies instead of milking old ones for the sake of monies

I dunno about that, I much prefer the remake of ocean's eleven to the 1960 original. There's other remakes (like scarface) that are far better known the the originals.

But then, the remakes of Taxi (Taxi) Nikita (The Assassin) and The Italian job (The Italian Job) are all evil.

I wonder if remakes work when they add new stuff that couldn't be done when they were made originally, and brung properly up to date.

Also, when they're not fucking retarded. the original Italian Job worked because the cars were small and nippy. using new minis, that are slightly wider than your average hummer, that kinda misses the point a little.

I don't see much point in remakes either, although I'm not as passionately disparaging about them as Fabbles. Planet of the Apes was better for being directed by Tim Burton, as was Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, but being remakes they didn't really bring anything new and I don't think the world of film would have been much worse off without them. With the exception of Evil Dead, which was remade from an unintentionally funny low budget horror to a deliberately funny slightly higher budget horror comedy.

.

amblin wrote:I've also never seen The Sound of Music. On principle. But that's a whole other films thread.

I have made it a vow that I will never ever watch titanic for as long as I live, as I somehow managed to cleverly avoid it back when it was the height of culture*.


*with teenage girls, that is.

amblin wrote: I've never seen the remake of that film. I refuse to.

I've also never seen The Sound of Music. On principle. But that's a whole other films thread.

The list of films I refuse to watch is probably quite lengthy.

Mr. Johnson wrote:
I have made it a vow that I will never ever watch titanic for as long as I live, as I somehow managed to cleverly avoid it back when it was the height of culture*.


*with teenage girls, that is.

I unwillingly saw titanic, but it got me sexual favours, so I consider that a win

I was exposed to the horror that is the notebook, but unfortunately it didn't get me sexual favours so never again!

Why not then...

Titanic - Overhyped
Mamma Mia - Overhyped and I hate ABBA
U-571 - Disgrace to the men who did actually capture the Enigma
The Patriot - Mel Gibson having a pop at the British
Braveheart - See above
The Wall - Gives me the fear
The Thomas Crown Affair - Pretentious nonsense