Sequels Or Remakes To Bad Movies That Turned Out Good

[Amadeus Arkham]

What sequels or remakes to bad or poorly received movies that ended up being a major improvement over its critically panned predecessors that you can name? A recent good example for me is The Suicide Squad, which was a major upgrade from the original movie. The Wrath Of Khan gets frequently cited as another example of a good movie sequel to the bad first movie.

[Gorthon616]

What sequels or remakes to bad or poorly received movies that ended up being a major improvement over its critically panned predecessors that you can name? A recent good example for me is The Suicide Squad, which was a major upgrade from the original movie. The Wrath Of Khan gets frequently cited as another example of a good movie sequel to the bad first movie.

Dread is the first that comes to mind for me.

[Vakanai]

The Thing
tenchars

[JBatmanFan05]

I don't think there are any except The Wrath Of Khan. I even googled up some lists, and I found I did not agree with those lists.

It's a lot easier to find sequels/remakes that are better than the original (where the original is good or at least not bad), but it's much harder to name ones where the original is "bad" (or at least close enough to bad).

[thwhtGuardian]

The Thing
tenchars

I mean, I love Carpenter's take...but the original isn't a bad movie by any objective stretch of the word.

[Frobisher]

28 Days Later was way better than 28 Days.

[Gaius]

The new Planet of the Apes trilogy over most of the sequels to the original movie and the Burton movie.

[FFJamie94]

The new Planet of the Apes trilogy over most of the sequels to the original movie and the Burton movie.

It's honestly not hard to be better than Burton.

[Jackalope89]

A lot of people (when it came out at least) said Shrek 2 was better than 1.

The second Nolan Batman film is often considered better because of Heath Ledger's Joker.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I don't think there are any except The Wrath Of Khan.

I wish I had found this thread sooner, because that would've been my choice.

I mean, I love Carpenter's take...but the original isn't a bad movie by any objective stretch of the word.

Agreed. The original version was a great sci-fi movie.

[Amadeus Arkham]

A lot of people (when it came out at least) said Shrek 2 was better than 1.

The second Nolan Batman film is often considered better because of Heath Ledger's Joker.

I think you misread the thread. Those aren’t sequels to bad or movies widely considered bad.

[Gaius]

It's honestly not hard to be better than Burton.

The unproduced scripts from in between the end of the original series and Burton were better.

[Riv86672]

1983’s Scarface was better than the OG 1932 version.

2017’s IT was better than the OG 1990 version, w. the caveat that Tim Curry is the better Pennywise.

2010’s True Grit is better than the OG 1969 version (sorry, Duke).

2012’s The Amazing Spider-man was better than 2002’s Spider-man.

2005’s King Kong was better than the OG 1933 version.

2009’s Star Trek was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than 1979’s Star Trek The Motion Picture.

[FFJamie94]

The unproduced scripts from in between the end of the original series and Burton were better.

Doesn’t surprise me, I think Burton is way too overrated.

Anyway, while not a terrible film, the first X-Men isn’t a very good movie, it’s got weird pacing, not much of a plot, it feels like a series of episodic scenes that are edited together. The second movie however, is actually a good movie. It’s a lot better structured and has a plot.

[Kirby101]

The Thing
tenchars

The 1951 original was a great scifi pic and a big hit. It beat both The Day the Earth Stood Still and When Worlds Collide that year. (both those are better movies)

The remake is very good, but not a remake of a bad movie or flop.