Suposedly bad Sequels you think are good?

[evangelionofasgard]

Alien 3 made a mistake by killing off the previous film's characters but I sometimes think some people have difficulty seeing past that. The rest of the film is actually very good. And compared to Resurrection, it looks even better.

Same for Quantum Of Solace. Nothing great -- especially after Casino Royale -- but on rewatches, it's decent fun. Just a bunch of chase scenes, basically. After Skyfall, I think it looks like a masterpiece..

agreed on alien 3

but please for the love of god explain the hate for skyfall

I'm also surprised that Iron Man 2 & 3 aren't on that list, given some of the reactions on this board.

sorry they never even crossed my mind, that said i think they are far more popular than most of the things i did put on the poll.

[deadboy80]

I've heard a lot of complaintsabout the Brosnon Bond films, he was one of my favorites. Batman Returns had drawn critisism at the time, but i enjoyed it too. X-men 3, is another I liked, but lots of people didn't. Psycho 3 is a good flick,not loved by many. The Blair Witch project 2, is another good film that took a beating by people.

[Guest_1001]

agreed on alien 3

but please for the love of god explain the hate for skyfall

Well long story short, I don't think Bond needed an origin story, especially not one where they were telling us how he was really old and not fit for duty anymore. They didn't need to introduce Moneypenny, Q and a male M. I thought Casino Royale handled Bond's origin better and it did it all in the first two minutes.

Then there were the lines. They were corny and not a good, James Bond kind of corny. More like the typical Hollywood one-liner kind of corny. "Good luck with that". "Welcome to Scotland". "A storm's coming". Plus, when it did come time to have some Bond one-liners, they didn't sound right in Daniel Craig's mouth. It was like they were trying to put a square peg in a round hole; he wasn't the edgy Bond of the previous two films, he was just Daniel Craig being forced to do Bond one-liners. And not even very good ones. "Put it all on red". What the hell's that!? And I say that as someone who likes Craig's Bond.

Why would Q plug the laptop into MI5's mainframe? Why did they have a "the villain wanted to get caught" twist after The Dark Knight and the Avengers already did it? Why did Bond have sex with a woman in the shower the night after she told him she was a victim of child sex trafficking? All horrible stuff.

The one good thing about it was Javier Bardem, who was much better than I thought he'd be.

[lancerman]

Well long story short, I don't think Bond needed an origin story, especially not one where they were telling us how he was really old and not fit for duty anymore. They didn't need to introduce Moneypenny, Q and a male M. I thought Casino Royale handled Bond's origin better and it did it all in the first two minutes.

Then there were the lines. They were corny and not a good, James Bond kind of corny. More like the typical Hollywood one-liner kind of corny. "Good luck with that". "Welcome to Scotland". "A storm's coming". Plus, when it did come time to have some Bond one-liners, they didn't sound right in Daniel Craig's mouth. It was like they were trying to put a square peg in a round hole; he wasn't the edgy Bond of the previous two films, he was just Daniel Craig being forced to do Bond one-liners. And not even very good ones. "Put it all on red". What the hell's that!? And I say that as someone who likes Craig's Bond.

Why would Q plug the laptop into MI5's mainframe? Why did they have a "the villain wanted to get caught" twist after The Dark Knight and the Avengers already did it? Why did Bond have sex with a woman in the shower the night after she told him she was a victim of child sex trafficking? All horrible stuff.

The one good thing about it was Javier Bardem, who was much better than I thought he'd be.

You must have never read the books.

Anyways I don't really mind all that stuff because the origin stuff were things we knew. Bond's parents did indeed die in a mountain climbing accident, he was Scottish, etc. Q and M are just titles so anybody can have them. Moneypenny was the real outlier since she is a real person and was essentially just a secretary. That's the only real origin thing in it tbh.

[evangelionofasgard]

You must have never read the books.

elaborate?

[lancerman]

I've heard a lot of complaintsabout the Brosnon Bond films, he was one of my favorites. Batman Returns had drawn critisism at the time, but i enjoyed it too. X-men 3, is another I liked, but lots of people didn't. Psycho 3 is a good flick,not loved by many. The Blair Witch project 2, is another good film that took a beating by people.

Brosnan had bad writing after Goldeneye. TND was pretty poor and just a jumbled mess. TWINE had some heart but it's plot was utterly forgettable (and I like that one), and DAD was just atrocious and a legitimate case of jumping the shark.

[Guest_1001]

elaborate?

I think he means Bond was a much bigger dick in the books than he is in the movies. Even so, it doesn't make me want to root for him and I always got the feeling that he at least had some respect for Bond girls. That didn't seem respectful and it also wasn't even referenced, which is another problem; they just did it and it was a typical movie sex scene.

[lancerman]

elaborate?

Tiffany Case- gangraped when she was a teenager and developed severe relationship issues with men. Bond knows this and beds her.
Honey Ryder- raped as a young girl. Bond beds her not long after learning this.
Pussy Galore- became lesbian because her uncle molester her when she was 12. Immediately after hearing this (literally she says this as she is naked in his bed) Bond beds her.
Tracy- is legitimately suicidal because she lost her daughter. Bond takes a deal with Draco to play her boyfriend. He beds her. Later he falls for her, but that's besides the point.

[Punisher007]

Heck Honey Ryder basically admitted that she had been raped in the Dr. No MOVIE, and Bond still slept with her. And then he treated Scaramanga's abused GF like crap in The Man With the Golden Gun (Bond is kind of an a-hole in general throughout that movie). As for his backstory, Bond being an orphan was also present in the old continuity as well. Alec Trevelyn mentions it in Goldeneye, and even said that Bond's parents died in a mountain-climbing accident (or a skiing accident, I forget which one it was).

As for this list, I'd remove:

-Star Trek: The Voyage Home-It's actually general considering to be one of the better ST films.
-Star Trek Into Darkness-It got good critical reviews, audience scores, and was financially successful. Some fans (not all) having issues with it does not a "bad movie" make.
-Thor: The Dark World-I haven't met many people who would argue that it's a BAD MOVIE. The big knock against it seems to be that it was underwhelming/disappointing with lots of wasted potential.

The sequels that I think are actually decent:

-Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls-I don't think that it's nearly as bad as some people claim, and I much prefer it to Temple of Doom. At least KOTCS feels like an Indiana Jones movie and doesn't have a bunch of problematic racial aspects (seriously, they were band from filming in India, that's how bad it got).
-Batman Forever-It's not a GREAT movie and it's got it's fair share of flaws. But I think that it's good a lot of good stuff to and I prefer it to either of the Burton films. At least BF TRIED to actually be about Batman and explore his character.
-The Godfather Part III-It's nowhere near as good as the first two (which is ultimately it's biggest problem, the first two were SO iconic that it was never going to be able to measure up) and it lacks the iconic characters from the first two. But it's still a decent flic in it's own right.

[lancerman]

Godfather 3 is a good movie. Hell it's might even be a very good movie. It just isn't in that "maybe greatest of all time" category of it's two predecessors. Some great stuff. Very good acting, except Sophia Coppola. And honestly the ending is pretty good.

[CJStriker]

what are sequels that the majority of people will claim are bad films but you actually like?

poll is multiple choice, please throw out examples not on the poll in the comments.

Interesting Question Evangelionofasgard, Thanks for the Thread and Nice to meet you my friend, Welcome to CBR!

Here is my take on each of these movies, the 1st Few:

Aliens 3, Terminator Salvation, Nightmare on Elm Street 2, Godfather 3, Quantum of Solice. I did not vote on either cause I did not either see the movies, seen enough of them to give an honest opinion or in the case of Terminator Salvation did not indeed care for it.

The Others:

Aliens Resurrection: I say it is decent to a good action survial space movie, not groundbreaking like 1 or 2 where by far. But take it for what it is I like the look of the Aliens and unique plot devices of combining humans and aliens.

Jason Goes to Hell: I think this is underrated. This is Jason at his most mystical and evil, this is when he was fully evolved as a Demon Being from just being a deformed killer. Gave Jason a near unbeatable mythos and really set for most of who Jason was for me before I saw most of his other movies. Also, gave the 1st crossover of Freddy vs. Jason.

The Crystal Skull: When I saw this movie I thought it was good to above good, the audience was very meek about it, but I let their judgement rule me to much back in 2008. I could feel most went in not expecting much, sad state of facts, don't like pre-judging a movie before it even began. Since then IMO it has grown better and better on me and was a good follow-up to the original 3! Does a good job of bringing the world of the 1950's to Jones's world like the originals did with the 1930's and pre-World War 2. Overall it is a Fun Movie then I glad to say and proud to say has become a Greatly Liking for me.

Others movie reviews to come soon.

[AJBopp]

I remember people were saying Temple was bad because of the graphic violence and Kate Capshaw. Which is silly as saying it was racist.

Temple of Doom was the primary reason we have a PG-13 MPAA rating today. People were up in arms because it wasn't R and was too graphic for younger viewers. Spielberg and Lucas essentially agreed with that view and pushed for a rating between PG and R.

I'm not sure what Star Trek IV is doing on that list. It was never considered a bad movie. The Search For Spock was generally received less well than that one.

[choptop]

but please for the love of god explain the hate for skyfall

i dont hate skyfall i just think it and avengers and avatar are overrated as hell.

[simbob4000]

What? No Temple of Doom in the poll? Before the Crystal Skull, that was the "bad" sequel. Personally, the first two Indy movies are the best.

IMO, none of these movies are really "bad", except the Star Trek movies listed in the poll. And Roger Moore was the worst 007, so IMO all his Bond movies are bad (no quotes).

But it's also the one people thought was the best after the first movie.

Not sure why Moonranker is there, that's one of Moore's better Bond films, and one of the more well know Bond movies. There are currently worse Bond movies, even if you're just looking at Moore's stuff.

[simbob4000]

agreed on alien 3

but please for the love of god explain the hate for skyfall


sorry they never even crossed my mind, that said i think they are far more popular than most of the things i did put on the poll.

Skyfall is a pretty bad movie. It's boring once it gets past the midway point, the movie is all about the villains poorly defined relationship to M, it doesn't feel like a Bond movie at all, (which is funny given the movie ends with a big Bond anniversary seal: In honor of Bonds 50th, here's an action movie like all the other big action movies) and it's a series of Bond references (that get worse and worse as the movie goes along) that go nowhere.