English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I ask this question because I've just had a disscussion with my other half who said"what with ET being the hit it was why did they never do a sequel" I persoanlly think it would have ruined ET...anyone else agree.

2007-12-28 03:39:44 · 24 answers · asked by snikleback 5 in Entertainment & Music Movies

*Personally even lol

2007-12-28 03:40:09 · update #1

Jungle Jungle...I asked my question 5 minutes after ET finished on ITV today,I also asked,wanting a normal answer...I read your question,not really the same were they?!

2007-12-28 04:21:30 · update #2

24 answers

You're right E.T. is not a movie that would have lent itself well to a sequel, there really isn't that much more ground to cover.

I liked X-Men 2, Spiderman 2, Next Friday, Bourne 3, Grease 2 (just kidding, just wanted to see if you were paying attention), Terminator 2

Basically any time you are dealing with movies that have lots of characters or extensive story (X-Men, Lord of the Rings, Spiderman etc...) you are going to do well with a sequel because you can get right into the action where you have to spend a lot of time setting everything up in the first movie.

2007-12-28 04:36:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

The Empire Strikes Back! Ok technically not just a sequel, part two in a trilogy, I know, but for me, as much as i enjoyed A New Hope, Empire was just so much darker and enlarged the Star Wars universe so much more! Of course without Hope we would never have got Empire!

2007-12-28 03:43:37 · answer #2 · answered by Andromeda Newton™ 7 · 1 0

I trust the Christmas trip post. additionally Toy tale 2 I liked the Empire strikes lower back greater effective than massive call Wars and Shrek 2 greater advantageous than Shrek (gotta love that Puss In Boots or perhaps Donkey grow to be funnier the 2nd time around)

2016-10-02 11:44:36 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Sequels better than the original. I can only think of two.

First is Terminator 2. An excellent film.
Second is The Empire Strikes Back.

2007-12-28 03:43:54 · answer #4 · answered by DMsView 6 · 3 0

Sequels generally are worse than their predecessor.

A Very Brady Sequel was better than the original Brady Bunch movie (which isn't saying much, lol). And Princess Diaries 2 had some scenes which I thought were better than the first one; overall, I'm not sure it was better.

And while it's part of a trilogy, I really enjoyed Scream 2 over 1 and 3. (They actually talk about this issue in that movie.)

2007-12-28 04:04:11 · answer #5 · answered by xK 7 · 0 3

I would say Rush Hour 3 was better than Rush Hour 1 and 2, but thats my own opinion! Sequels mostly are better because if the first movie was even a slight hit then they could get a lot more funding! Cheaper by the Dozen 2 was well better than the first one!!

2007-12-28 03:46:45 · answer #6 · answered by -luvnmyipod- 2 · 0 2

Godfather two
Empire Strikes Back
Meet the Fockers

2007-12-28 05:50:12 · answer #7 · answered by Michael F 4 · 1 0

Airplane 2

2007-12-28 11:24:04 · answer #8 · answered by RETRIBUTION 2 · 1 1

Harry Potter

2007-12-28 03:48:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The Godfather 2

and

Spiderman 2

2007-12-28 03:42:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers