Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

There are sequels that do surpass the originals. (Spider-Man 2, X2, Godfather 2, Bourne Supremacy, Blade 2 etc.)

Which sequels do you think were unnecessary? I think Terminator 3 should have never been made because T2 ended so well. I guess the producers just wanted to make more money.

Matrix sequels, sequels to Disney Classics, Dumb and Dumberer, Son of the Mask... Basically any sequel that doesn't have any of the original actors/characters.

There are too many to list.

Originally posted by lordofwar
Godfather 2

eer

Whether ytou like the Matrix sequels or not, I am not sure they come under the heading 'unneccessary'. They certainly had purpose.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Whether ytou like the Matrix sequels or not, I am not sure they come under the heading 'unneccessary'. They certainly had purpose.

agreed

i didn't like the 2nd or 3rd but they defiantly were not unnecessary. they were integral to the plot.

Son of the Mask, Dumb and Dumberer, all those shitty Batman sequels, Scary Movie 2 and 3, The Ring 2,, and more i cant thnk of right now

Originally posted by lordofwar
There are sequels that do surpass the originals. (Spider-Man 2, X2, Godfather 2, Bourne Supremacy, Blade 2 etc.)

Which sequels do you think were unnecessary? I think Terminator 3 should have never been made because T2 ended so well. I guess the producers just wanted to make more money.

spiderman and bourne supremacy? supremacy is part of a trillogy of novels.. and spiderman.. its a comic with tons of storys.. why wouldnt they make more?

the ones i hate are where they do like the same story but with a like B-list cast.. like cruel intentions 2, starship troopers 2

only a handful of sequels are necessary.

here are my opinions.

Godfather: part 2- Stfu, I loved it. I think Robert deniro's performance ruled, and if you think any different, than blow me.

The matrix was good, the sequels were somewhat necessary, but not as good as the original.

Rocky II, III, And IV were good IMO, but the fifth one sucked.

All of the Indiana Jones movies are spectacular, anyone who thinks those sequels are bad should be burned, hanged, thrown into a hot tar pit, and burned some more.

The highlander original was superb, but the sequels were walk-out-of-the-theater-laughing bad. end game was a 6/10 IMO.

The bloodsport sequels were unnecessary.

Spider-man 2 wasn't bad, but i prefer the original, there was too much CGI in the 2nd one.

Both of the X-men were equally good, but the beginning of the first "X-men" is unbeatable. the introduction of the characters was done so perfectly, ESPECIALLY wolverine.

Ace ventura: when nature calls was hilarious, the choice to use steve odekerk as the director was a good one.

The bourne Identity is much better than the sequel IMO, it had excellent cinematography for a action movie, and The sequel lagged behind just a tad.

The son of the mask, was absolutely terrible, you cannot make a sequel with different actors as long as the original had Jim carrey.

dumb and dumberer was not as good as the Dumb and dumber, but at least it was entertaining.

The original Batman was great, just great Long live Tim burton, and batman returns was just as good. but batman forever, and batman and robin just lagged behind so badly, running out of material much?
but batman begins surpasses all other batman movies IMO.

Jurassic park and Jurassic park 2 the first one being the absolute best. were good, but JP 3??! They should have stopped after 2.

The first Die Hard was excellent, absolutely awesome. But the next 2 were mediocre. and i dont know what the 4th is going to be like.

Terminator was great, and the sequel was even better! the third was very entertaining, but you CANT beat the 2nd.

Under siege with seagal was fantastic, the sequel was ok.

All the harry potters are needed, along with all the Lord of the rings.

all disney sequels are usually utter crap.

the ring 2 was crap.

Nigtmare on elmstreet was a good slasher, but they should have stopped after 3, and number 2 was amazingly BAD.

and last but not least starship troopers 2 was crap.

I cant do every sequel, So here are are few.

Too much to mention, but for example, ghostbusters 2 and gremlims 2 sucked in comparation with the firts ones.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Whether ytou like the Matrix sequels or not, I am not sure they come under the heading 'unneccessary'. They certainly had purpose.
Yeah, they had purpose, but I still don't think that makes them necessary... the story worked absolutely fine without them, and in fact, I preferred the story without them.

By the same token some would call the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy 'unnecessary'. Because it is. The saga didn't need them, they're just backstory. They are unnecessary but not invaluable...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Whether ytou like the Matrix sequels or not, I am not sure they come under the heading 'unneccessary'. They certainly had purpose.

In my opinion, they didn't. I'm not just saying that they were bad, I'm saying that they actually ruined what was accomplished in the 1st. First, the first one was symbolic of the bible where he died and then came back to life. They didn't need to symbolize him as Jesus again (he sacrificed himself for man kind at the end of Revolutions). Also, in the first the entire concept where they could do all that cool shit was due to the fact that it was in a virtual reality. In the second and third one, he developed mental powers in the real world (this takes away from the whole explanation of why they had special abilities). Third, he already defeated Agent Smith. It was dumb for them to just simply bring him back and say 'ha, you didn't kill me, you just made me better.'

Well, if you day so. But I saw therm as absolutley integral to the meaning of the first. You just seem to be quoting reasons not to like them.

Likewise Star Wars- the story was actually incomplete without the Prequels.

What do you mean by quoting reasons not to like them? Are you saying it is necessary for Neo to beat Smith again? It would seem that he beat Smith at the end of the 1st, so why bring him back and fight him again? That does not seem necessary.

Trust Me Bambi does not need a sequel! I CAN NOT BELIEVE THEY ARE MAKIING 1 IT IS UNESERAYRY

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Likewise Star Wars- the story was actually incomplete without the Prequels.
I disagree. The original trilogy existed on its own for almost 20 years. Sure, the prequels add to that story, but it's just backstory and ultimately unnecessary. And in some cases the prequels even take away from my appreciation of the originals... (the demystification of The Force by turning it into science).

Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
. And in some cases the prequels even take away from my appreciation of the originals... (the demystification of The Force by turning it into science).

I agree, Now if you watch it in chronological order, you dont get the fantastic surprise that lukes father is dath vader..

The Star Wars prequels weren't necessary. I mean, obviously something made Anakin mad, and turned him evil. The movies were just Lucas' cash-cow.

I remember the first time I watched Star Wars, I read the beginning, "Episode 4?? What about the first three? Why weren't those made?"

So I felt the prequel trilogy was very necessary, not necessarily good, but it's good that they were made.

There are A LOT of sequels to mention that were unnecessary.

"Episode 4" was added at the time of the OT SE theatrical re-release, once the PT was planned and announced. So, that change didn't occur until the late 90's.

That was never original, nor intended.

american psycho 2
be cool

american psycho 2
be cool

The Exorcist has prequels and sequels that are about to kill the effect of the original. Seriously we only needed one Exorcist.

Originally posted by Mandorallen
only a handful of sequels are necessary.

here are my opinions.

Godfather: part 2- Stfu, I loved it. I think Robert deniro's performance ruled, and if you think any different, than blow me.

The matrix was good, the sequels were somewhat necessary, but not as good as the original.

Rocky II, III, And IV were good IMO, but the fifth one sucked.

All of the Indiana Jones movies are spectacular, anyone who thinks those sequels are bad should be burned, hanged, thrown into a hot tar pit, and burned some more.

The highlander original was superb, but the sequels were walk-out-of-the-theater-laughing bad. end game was a 6/10 IMO.

The bloodsport sequels were unnecessary.

Spider-man 2 wasn't bad, but i prefer the original, there was too much CGI in the 2nd one.

Both of the X-men were equally good, but the beginning of the first "X-men" is unbeatable. the introduction of the characters was done so perfectly, ESPECIALLY wolverine.

Ace ventura: when nature calls was hilarious, the choice to use steve odekerk as the director was a good one.

The bourne Identity is much better than the sequel IMO, it had excellent cinematography for a action movie, and The sequel lagged behind just a tad.

The son of the mask, was absolutely terrible, you cannot make a sequel with different actors as long as the original had Jim carrey.

dumb and dumberer was not as good as the Dumb and dumber, but at least it was entertaining.

The original Batman was great, just great Long live Tim burton, and batman returns was just as good. but batman forever, and batman and robin just lagged behind so badly, running out of material much?
but batman begins surpasses all other batman movies IMO.

Jurassic park and Jurassic park 2 the first one being the absolute best. were good, but JP 3??! They should have stopped after 2.

The first Die Hard was excellent, absolutely awesome. But the next 2 were mediocre. and i dont know what the 4th is going to be like.

Terminator was great, and the sequel was even better! the third was very entertaining, but you CANT beat the 2nd.

Under siege with seagal was fantastic, the sequel was ok.

All the harry potters are needed, along with all the Lord of the rings.

all disney sequels are usually utter crap.

the ring 2 was crap.

Nigtmare on elmstreet was a good slasher, but they should have stopped after 3, and number 2 was amazingly BAD.

and last but not least starship troopers 2 was crap.

I cant do every sequel, So here are are few.
good points

Yeah there are too many to mention right off the bat but as mentioned earlier,ghostbusters 2 and gremlin two were bad ideas.Others I can think of would be Rocky 4 and 5,"should have ended with a trilogy." The star wars series should have ended after empire strikes back IMO.Karate Kid two was a bad idea.superman 3 and 4.as mentioned earlier,terminater 3 was a really bad idea.Beverly hills cop two another.conan two.Rambo two and three. Leathel weapon 3 and four. All for now,Like i said,theres quite a few sequels out there that should never have been made.Im sure I can come up with some more some other time but thats all I can think of at the moment.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Well, if you day so. But I saw therm as absolutley integral to the meaning of the first. You just seem to be quoting reasons not to like them.

Likewise Star Wars- the story was actually incomplete without the Prequels.

But where to stop then? I mean there is still missing in Star Wars as well as in Matrix. Now yopu could say in Matrix onl Neos life as The One is impoprtant so you could say it's completed....but Star Wars is missing, what aboot his time between him becoming Vader and ANH ...you could make Three more movies out of that.

To be honest I think that The First Matrix movie as well as ANH or the OT can stand alone and wouldn't have needed anything to them. Just because there obviously is more story to a Movie (that's liek that in every movie, there's not one movie that couldn't have a Back Story or something they skipped or whatever) it doesn't need to be told.

Originally posted by Sir Nauj
good points

thank you.

Originally posted by StinkFist462
Son of the Mask, Dumb and Dumberer, all those shitty Batman sequels, Scary Movie 2 and 3, The Ring 2,, and more i cant thnk of right now

Just thought of a couple more.Yeah all the batman movies were shit except for Begins of course.Then there is 48 hours two and then there is halloween 3.Man what was the purpose of that movie? it has nothing whatsoever to do with the first two?

Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
Yeah, they had purpose, but I still don't think that makes them necessary... the story worked absolutely fine without them, and in fact, I preferred the story without them.

By the same token some would call the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy 'unnecessary'. Because it is. The saga didn't need them, they're just backstory. They are unnecessary but not invaluable...

Boy you can say that again.The backstory for star wars the prequels were totally unnessary and hardly invaluable.We did not need those movies.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
.Yeah all the batman movies were shit except for Begins


?

i loved batman, and batman returns. but Begins is still unbeatable.

Matrix 2 & 3 - it was pretty damn obvious Neo is The One. The One wins. The first Matrix was a case of Neo becoming the One. Was he The One? Maybe he wasn't - could he die? Yes he could. He did. By the end he is the one and what everyone thought would happen, that he ends the war, is confirmed after 2 unneccassary sequels. We didnt need to see either to know it happened.

Star Wars prequels I and II - we know the story, and they're shite comparred to the originals. Fans can claim the story is incomplete without it, but this is my opinion. Their negative effect on the originals & the constant retarded ret-conning over the years. - I'd prefer they never existed. The only prequel of any value is Episode III. We didn't actually have to see any of this to know it happened.

Terminator 3: Brown Edition - Arnie was a characature of his T2 self, with no apparent plot device for being anything like T2 arnie, the female Terminator was crap, the effects were crap, the setting was all wrong (where was the cyberpunk-like feel? why was everything orange? the colour palette was not Terminator, no cold hues, silly glowing eyes, too much sleek glitz and not enough clunky war machines), the story was stupid. Just no.

Jurassic Park 3: Talking, green-with-feathers velociraptors. A new "mega dinosaur" with its own ringtone, making it look about as intimidating as Barney. Annoying characters. Shittest climx to a trilogy ever. Run to the beach - end. Enough said.

Alien 4: Ripley died. She's still dead. End. The story follows Ripley, not clone superpowers fake Ripley. Ripley is still dead. This fake Ripley is nice and all, but the cast seem to have all worked with the circus at some point in their career and it's like watching a car crash. Too much showing of the aliens & Winona Ryder.

Batman & Robin: Utter unnacceptability as much as unneccessary.

btw: Opinion.

The Legend of Zorro is the next sequel. It took 7 years to come out. Plus they don't have Anthony Hopkins. Doesn't look too good.

Ocean's twelve, Im sorry if any one liked that movie, but i loved ocenas 11 (remake). Twelve just ruined it for me for some reason.

oh well just my opinion

Cheers!

Originally posted by lordofwar
The Legend of Zorro is the next sequel. It took 7 years to come out. Plus they don't have Anthony Hopkins. Doesn't look too good.

Plus the 1st one sucked.

Yeah I'm still baffled as to why theres a Zorro 2.

I saw the posters for it and was thinking: "What the hell?"

Speed 2: Cruise Control didn't live up to the first one. Plus Keanu Reeves wasn't in it. Glad he wasn't in this garbage. Poor Sandra Bullock.

Originally posted by Myth
Plus the 1st one sucked.

The 1st one was amazing. One of the best swashbuckling movies I have ever seen.

Originally posted by Myth
Plus the 1st one sucked.

I agree with you. Zorro was a piece of garbage.

hey 2 fast 2 furios was not un necesary but it was bad the fast and the furios was the best of the two.

For all you people that are ragging on this guy.

Originally posted by lordofwar
There are sequels that do surpass the originals. (Spider-Man 2, X2, Godfather 2, Bourne Supremacy, Blade 2 etc.)

Which sequels do you think were unnecessary? I think Terminator 3 should have never been made because T2 ended so well. I guess the producers just wanted to make more money.

-Son of the mask - "hey lets make a sequel to the comedy hit The Mask without jim carey!"

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
"Episode 4" was added at the time of the OT SE theatrical re-release, once the PT was planned and announced. So, that change didn't occur until the late 90's.

That was never original, nor intended.
Was Empire's "Episode 5" title added with the OT SE too?

I remember hearing something about Lucas writing all six movies but just making #4 because he felt that was the best one. Then he went on to #5 and #6.

Jurassic Park 2 and 3.

Bellow is a lit of unnessasey sequels in no particular order!
Shrek: Rorever After
Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Santa Clause 3
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon emperor
Peter Pan: Return to Neverland

i can't think of any more 2 the moment.

Originally posted by Ushgarak

Likewise Star Wars- the story was actually incomplete without the Prequels.
I agree completely!

Escape From L.A.

Originally posted by C-3POTheClever
Bellow is a lit of unnessasey sequels in no particular order!
Shrek: Rorever After
Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Santa Clause 3
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon emperor
Peter Pan: Return to Neverland

i can't think of any more 2 the moment.
Couldn't agree more on those, especially Tomb of the Dragon Emperor. Was overjoyed at first when I heard there was gonna be a 3rd movie for the Brendan Frasier Mummy series, but then for us to have gotten what we got from it... Give me back Imhotep and a setting in Egypt anyday.

And to add on to the list, all the Paranormal Activity sequels after 2.

"Paranormal Activity" 2-73

Nice Post

Yeah that movie sequel was totally unnessary, Can't believe they made that one.

Starship Troopers 2, 3, 4 if not already mentioned.

Cruel Intentions did not need a 3 or 4.
Nor movies like Basic Instinct or Wild Things.

And let's not forget (actually YES, let's forget) RoadHouse 2.

Originally posted by Jedi Sheriff
Escape From L.A. Was good mindless fun, but yea, didn't need to be made.

I think Matrix would have been a great standalone movie.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Starship Troopers 2, 3, 4 if not already mentioned.

Agree with 2 & 3 but as for 4 your crazy.

Was 4 good?

It was funny when I read the book, had almost nothing in common with the movies. Aside from the broad plot.

Originally posted by Mindset
Was 4 good?

It was funny when I read the book, had almost nothing in common with the movies. Aside from the broad plot.

Havn't actually watched the 4th movie but i hear its much more like the 1st movie.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Havn't actually watched the 4th movie but i hear its much more like the 1st movie.
You need to see it before you hop aboard, my man. It's pretty disappointing. Quite cheesy in parts. Is it better than 2? By a mile. Is it anywhere near as good as the original? Not by a long shot.

Not sure how the 3rd Pirates of the Carribean movie could be considered unnecessary. The second movie ended on a cliffhanger.

There's a difference between a "bad" sequel, which is what the 3rd movie was, and an "unnecessary" one.

That said, both PotC 2 and 3 were unnecessary. 2 was at least a decent movie though.

All of the PotC movies were great, and if you disagree you're stupid and probably like having sex with your sister.

I'll not deny the latter but I'll fight like hell to disprove the former!