[QUOTE=Jim Kelly;5078661]STAYIN' ALIVE is a sequel to SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER and GREASE 2 is a sequel to GREASE. But you don't need to see either movie--you might want to for a laugh, but they're both unnecessary.[/QUOTE]
Fun fact (well, not so fun), while filming, the script was still being written for Grease 2. For instance, notice how Frenchie vanishes halfway through the film and never mentioned after.
Any Friday the 13th after Part IV: The Final Chapter
Any Halloween after the first. I did like IV, H20, and Zombie's first, but they're all pretty ignorable.
Any Terminator after Part 2: Judgment Day
Any Exorcist after the first.
[QUOTE=Immortal Weapon;5078669]What you do with a sequel that introduced elements to a series that make it impossible to ignore? For the Star Wars fan who hated the prequel trilogy how you ignore things like Midi-chlorians and all the things that turned Anakin into Vader?
How about Planet of the Apes? I'm sure most would bury the sequels but much of the reboot trilogy largely draws from Escape, Conquest and Battle.[/QUOTE]
In my case, a LOT of compartmentalizing.
Pretty much what I expected, this is just "Which sequels do you wish hadn't been made?" the thread.
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5078775]Pretty much what I expected, this is just "Which sequels do you wish hadn't been made?" the thread.[/QUOTE]
It would definitely be more interesting if there was a focus around the important series elements introduced in a derided entry of a series. Say, how do fans of Wonder Woman and Aquaman film cope with those movies being apart of cinematic universe that's largely been negatively received? It puts the DCEU in an interesting place it can't reboot unless it wants to throw away those versions of the characters.
There's the interesting place Prometheus falls into that throws a monkey wrench into Alien lore and depending on who you ask is a misunderstood masterpiece or a total disaster.
[QUOTE=Immortal Weapon;5078791]It would definitely be more interesting if there was a focus around the important series elements introduced in a derided entry of a series. Say, how do fans of Wonder Woman and Aquaman film cope with those movies being apart of cinematic universe that's largely been negatively received? It puts the DCEU in an interesting place it can't reboot unless it wants to throw away those versions of the characters.
There's the interesting place Prometheus falls into that throws a monkey wrench into Alien lore and depending on who you ask is a misunderstood masterpiece or a total disaster.[/QUOTE]
It can totally reboot - see JOKER, see The Batman. Just reboot the stuff that didn't work, keep doing Wonder Woman and Aquaman, and just give up on the shared universe thing and some big team up film.
[QUOTE=Riv86672;5078598]Speaking of, HIGHLANDER 2. Pretty sure that’d be unanimous.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much. Had nothing to do with the Highlander concept. In fact, is there anything ever done with Highlander after the first movie that doesn't either repeat the same story (Highlander 3) or contradict it (the television series and the later movies)?
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5078775]Pretty much what I expected, this is just "Which sequels do you wish hadn't been made?" the thread.[/QUOTE]
That's inevitable. That's what such a question has to be. The only real issue is how many people feel that way.
[QUOTE=Castle;5078507]
[B]Aladdin: Return of Jafar and Aladdin and the King of Thieves[/B]
[/QUOTE]
I actually liked Return of Jafar. Never saw the third one, though.
[QUOTE=Riv86672;5078598]Speaking of, HIGHLANDER 2. Pretty sure that’d be unanimous.[/QUOTE]
I remember watching that and thinking "What the **** is this?!"
For me, I'd say Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. I can go with the Fantastic Beasts movies (though I am starting to wonder if they will actually continue them- between Rowling's recent comments about Trans people to the continuing controversy around Depp and the new controversy around Miller, on top of Covid delays, that series seems to be dead in the water). But everything I've read about Cursed Child makes if seem like poorly written fan fiction that never should have seen the light of day, let alone be turned into a play.
[QUOTE=Immortal Weapon;5078791]It would definitely be more interesting if there was a focus around the important series elements introduced in a derided entry of a series. Say, how do fans of Wonder Woman and Aquaman film cope with those movies being apart of cinematic universe that's largely been negatively received? It puts the DCEU in an interesting place it can't reboot unless it wants to throw away those versions of the characters.
There's the interesting place Prometheus falls into that throws a monkey wrench into Alien lore and depending on who you ask is a misunderstood masterpiece or a total disaster.[/QUOTE]
I think there has already been a bit of retconning in both Wonder Woman and Aquaman. Wonder Woman '84, I think, is going to act as a soft reboot to the universe in some aspects (Diana will still be active in Man's World, just not forming close bonds with humans), and will probably help set the stage for a rebooted Justice League down the line. Meanwhile, if you watch Justice League and then Aquaman, neither movie really lines up. It's been a while, but in Aquaman I don't think Arthur had even met Mera until she came to shore, and his quadrant is his mother's; but in Justice League, it seems like Arthur meets Mera for the first time in that Atlantis outpost, and she is the one who gives him the armor and Quadrant. I think James Wan was trying to walk a fine line, but either felt like or was told he didn't have to be beholden to Justice League.
As for Prometheus, I enjoy it for what it is, which is NOT an Alien movie.
I think that the only really solid way to say a sequel or continuation is easy to ignore is if it’s eventually a non-factor in the franchise going forward - either because it’s box office take was underwhelming enough or long enough ago that it’s been rebooted or repackaged, or if the property moves on and just never references it again.
And that can go *both* ways; if you want to ignore one side of the Star Trek alternate reality split or the other, you now have a vehicle for that.
I’d say this can go from very clear, bitter, and insistent denunciations of previous entries - like the relationship the various Terminator films after T2 have to each other - to more subtle and ambiguously ignored entries - Iron Man 3, for instance.
IM3 is the one case where I’m curious what everyone else thinks - if it can be excepted as an example of an easy-to-skip movie, than we have one end of the scale vs the more clearly defined endpoint with hard continuity reboots and relaunches.
I mean, the most visible changes in that film that actually seem to have stuck would be what model of armor Tony’s on, and him not needing the arc reactor in his chest anymore. Everything else seems to be a total non-factor going forward - Pepper doesn’t have her Extremis powers, Killian’s not been mentioned again and his Mandarin ID is being taken away totally, and all the other events of the film are kind of unnecessary to know. Thor: The Dark World is more concretely tied to the MCU, thanks to Loki’s character arc and it’s importance to Endgame, even though TDW has a similarly poor reputation.
Unless Shang Chi’s new Mandarin references Killian, nothing major from this movie would ever be required watching for MCU audiences.
Thoughts?
[QUOTE=Castle;5078507][B]Dragon Ball GT. [/B] I never felt Dragon Ball Super ever met the greatness of Dragon Ball and Dragon Ball Z, but I will take Super as an apology for GT that is very not canon. [/B][/QUOTE]
I can understand the general hate for GT. However, it did do a lot right and had interesting concepts at play. SS4 is, in my mind, a much better form than SSB. Baby was a great villain with a fantastic backstory (the best since Frieza at the time), and having the Dragon Balls as the last major threat to the earth (the very things that helped saved it in the past).
Super has contributed a few good things to the canon - Beerus, Whis, Super Dragon Balls, Ultra Instinct, Zamasu. But the whole show was too repetitive for my liking.
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5078642]I liked Highlander 2. Had the Mongol villain and the adopted son right?[/QUOTE]
No that was 3. 2 was the one with Michael Ironside.
[QUOTE=Powerboy;5078950]Pretty much. Had nothing to do with the Highlander concept. In fact, is there anything ever done with Highlander after the first movie that doesn't either repeat the same story (Highlander 3) or contradict it (the television series and the later movies)?[/QUOTE]
Don't think so. All things after the first movie only work if you see it as an alternative version of it.
Well, the obvious for me are for course the star wars sequels and pretty much anything terminator related after T2.
Same with all those predators or aliens vs predators movies, i'm going to just stick with the original, thanks you very much. (though predator 2 isn't that bad)
DB Super, well, i like very much what they did with Vegeta, Krilin and C18, they are my favorite characters so thanks for that, but overall i didn't like it. Really not.
Visually the first arc is plain unprofessional, the whole thing with Trunks could have been somewhat decent if not for that ridiculous ending, i didn't give a damn about that whole mutliverse tournament and that show actually managed to make me dislike Son Goku.
Gratz guys lol.