Can you think of any sequels that were better than the original?
2006-10-07 20:19:17 · 22 answers · asked by Twinkles 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
Star Wars, The GodFather II
They're usually worse because they are only capitalizing on the sucess and originality of the first, and in that, they don't add anything new for the viewer. So you go in expecting the same freshness as you did with the first, only to find the same characters doing slightly different things...
2006-10-07 20:21:43 · answer #1 · answered by GobleyGook 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Why are film sequels generally awful?
Because the original is good then w/o being creative they keep making 'em.
The concept is lost once you watch the 1st one & see the twisted thinking.
Like Sixth Sense, obviously if you see the 1st one there would be no surprises to catch you after that.
Enough already I liked Ocean's Eleven but 12 & now 13??
Come on!
Same w/ Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Child's Play, Blair Witch Project, etc.
The element of surprise is gone!!!
Can you think of any sequels that were better than the original?
I think these were not necessarily better but perhaps equal...
Bourne Idenity & Bourne Supremcy (sp?)
Saw & Saw II
Pirates of the Caribean I & II
Friday & Next Friday (I keep waiting for Friday After Next) LOL
2006-10-07 20:30:00 · answer #2 · answered by Cat 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Cause successful films without sequels are usually very hard to write, most of the good ideas will have been used in the first film and plus the actors who starred in it might not be contracted for a sequel.
Wasn't the Godfather II thought to be better than the first one?
2006-10-08 02:40:29 · answer #3 · answered by w.campbell547@btinternet.com 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think because they seemed forced upon to make one and they put less effort into the sequel. Or they thought the story line had not been used up yet but infact it was.
Here's some sequels I like more than the firsts:
Shrek 2 over Shrek 1
Empire Strikes Back over Star Wars
Saw 2 over Saw 1
Kill Bill 2 a little bit more than Kill Bill 1
Toy Story 2 over Toy Story 1
2006-10-07 20:24:39 · answer #4 · answered by jjc92787 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
most are worse because the studio producers and whatnot are just out to make an easy buck by using popularity of good movies to get people to see the bad sequel, and a sequel that was better: godfather two, and pirates two, some james bond movies, an indiana jonews flick or two, star wars, ya know, so, dont lose hope, there are some good ones
2006-10-10 11:06:09 · answer #5 · answered by krash726 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I find sequals are too often afterthoughts... the first one was tied off so nicely (because they never expected it to be popular enough to support doing a sequal) that they struggle to find a premise for the plot using the same characters and in a way that will still make sense to the first one.
The only sequals that do a good job of standing on their own are ones that were always planned as the next chapter in a long book or simply a whole new movie all together. The Indianna Jones trilogy comes to mind (although they seem a little dated now) or pretty much anything after the first prequel of the new Starwars series could beat that annoying kid actor and all the lines they gave to that Jaja Binks or whatever his name is.
2006-10-07 20:27:31 · answer #6 · answered by wreck_beach 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They're generally crap because they're less about making a good movie and more about cashing in the success of the first film.
I prefer the Empire Strikes Back to the first Star Wars films, although all three were great. I'm really pleased that you can now by the original releases on DVD (I bought them all on the day of release). George Lucas should be shot for messing around with the originals. The man has no shame.
2006-10-07 22:04:03 · answer #7 · answered by Gail H 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
A good idea abused.
Technically "silence of the Lambs" was a sequel as a film of the first book with the same characters but different actors had already been made.
2006-10-07 20:39:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
because studios rush the make them, and anything that is rushed is generally not done well. also normally its a different director or writer that tries to be new and inventive and ends up having a different direction to the original. as for 'better than the original' sequels... well i think its better if you go in assuming that it won't be and then you might get a shock!
2006-10-07 20:42:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, let's see...
Silence of the Lambs was superior to Manhunter.
Terminator II was far better than the first.
Some people liked Shrek II and Toy Story 2 better than the originals.
Or, if you just want to look at the numbers, several sequels outsold their originals at the box office: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_best_movie_sequels
2006-10-07 20:23:59 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋