Films with multiple sequels that you would prefer it had been stand-alone

[frankiedetroit]

Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's a perfect movie. No sequels needed.

Second, while Godfather 2 is a classic and arguably better than The Godfather, I would sacrifice it to erase the memory of Godfather 3.

[Immortal Weapon]

Pirates of the Caribbean comes to mind. I love and remember the first movie but I can't remember any story of any movie following the original.

The second film is my favorite. Its a natural progression of everything that happened in the first film and Captain Barbossa was an unforgettable villain.

[Phoenix Raptor]

The Matrix: still one of my favourite movies ever. Whilst there were some good ideas / characters in the sequels, I'd have much preferred to be pining for a sequel than watch the sequels we got.

Underworld: as much as I love Kate Beckinsale in skintight leather and rubber, the original film was a great standalone piece that, aside from the hybrid stinger at the very end, wrapped the story up quite nicely.

Robocop: no need for what came afterwards in my opinion.

Raiders Of The Lost Ark: another perfect standalone movie for me.

Jaws: how many killer sharks do we really need...? In 3D, no less!

Pirates Of The Caribbean: everything wrapped up perfectly at the end of this, more or less. Sequels that were a blatant cash-grab.

Tron: as much as I enjoyed Legacy as a movie, rather than as a continuation of a story, it simply wasn't as groundbreaking or engaging as the original. The original is a stunning film.

[Vakanai]

I just watched it again and they REALLY should have started with a Jeckyl and Hyde movie and moved on from there. It wasn't a bad movie and wasn't a good movie, it was just a waste of 2 hours movie.

Oh my god agreed! It's pretty bad that the most/only enjoyable part of a Mummy movie was Jekyll and Hyde, but wow Russel Crowe in the role was amazing. I'd gladly pay to see him take on the part of the good doctor and his not so good counterpart again.

Okay, the only enjoyable part of the movie other than just watching Sofia Boutella being gorgeous.

[Vakanai]

Robocop: no need for what came afterwards in my opinion.

Raiders Of The Lost Ark: another perfect standalone movie for me.

I personally love Robocop 2, even if it doesn't reach the height of the original, and The Last Crusade and the Young Indiana Jones series were pretty good as well.

[MikeP]

I always felt both Rocky and Rambo work better as one and done stories. The sequels just ruin the characters.

[Gaastra]

Well with raiders I really liked Last Crusade and as cheesy as it is temple of doom was my favorite jones film as a kid. Aunt tapped it for us on a vhs tape from HBO (she had it. We didn't) along with gremlins, commando, follow that bird, fraggle rock episodes and others so it's the jones movie we watched the most as kids!

[ChrisIII]

Add to that, Matrix Ressurections and Pirates V were pretty much just done to give the characters a happier ending than what they were left with (Getting Will free of the curse; Matrix and Trinity came back to life and are together again etc).

Same goes for Balboa and Rocky V, sort of; Rocky is able to box again one last time (The brain injuries from V are kind of swept under the rug), and despite not being rich like he used to be, seems to have a stable business with the restaurant; although, on the other hand, Adrian is dead.

[bruceleegreyhulk]

Wishmaster: 4 Movies wasn't really needed.



Texas Chainsaw Massacre

Halloween: should have just been a standalone movie or at least ending with the second movie.

[superduperman]

Toy Story.

Robocop.

Joker. I know it hasn't come out yet but it doesn't need a sequel.

Godfather. The second one was great but the third one ruined the franchise and it would just be better to let it be a single movie.

Jaws.

Rocky.

The Hangover. Seriously, how many of those movies can they make?

The Fast and Furious series. Why is this a series?

Home Alone.

Pirates of the Caribbean.

[superduperman]

Star Wars.

There, I said it. Someone had to.

GET HIM!!!!

In all seriousness, in recent years I've begun to wonder if this might not have been for the best.

[ChrisIII]

Think part of the reason F & F got big is that technically, it didn't get a "true" sequel until the fourth film. The second film only brought back Bryan/Paul Walker and his boss and it was kind of obvious that Tyreese's character was sort of a copy of Vin Diesel (or was originally written as such). Tokyo Drift, at least at first, is a standalone apart from Vin's cameo.

Then 4 brought back the original cast & also tied in Tokyo Drift a bit, and the fifth (Which was pretty much Ocean's Eleven with cars) was a massive hit so they more or less have followed the same format since, although with a bit more spy movie stuff being added.

[Captain Craig]

I always felt both Rocky and Rambo work better as one and done stories. The sequels just ruin the characters.

I wholly disagree on both but that's ok if we don't agree.

[ChrisIII]

It's kind of interesting that the Rambo sequels have a pretty huge body count but First Blood pretty much just has one; and it's mostly an accident (As for the dogs, it's kind of ambigious whether Rambo killed him or not))

I haven't read the book but from what I know it's completely opposite, though....and Trautman does warn Teasle that an unleashed Rambo could result in a high body count, which is exactly what happens in the sequels.

[MikeP]

I wholly disagree on both but that's ok if we don't agree.

Agree to disagree! *slaps you with glove*