• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Movies that you feel didn't need sequels...

AGXStarseed

AGXStarseed

Well-Known Member
It's no secret that a fair number of movies that prove to be hits at the box office and/or popular enough will find themselves getting one or more sequels.
However, I think most of us will agree that some of those movies really did not need sequels - especially if a movie wraps up all its loose ends by the end of the film yet still gets a sequel.

Are there any movies you've watched that got sequels you didn't think were necessary?

Here's a few from me:


1. Highlander: A fun and classic 80's movie about Immortals battling and killing one another in pursuit of the 'Ultimate' prize. The movie finished its story and wrapped up fairly well - yet for some reason some people decided they wanted more and completely screwed over the continuity in the process.

2. The Blair Witch Project: This film about a trio of teen going camping in the woods and getting lost was by no means a great movie, but it revolutionized the found-footage and horror genres, with many people indeed finding it creepy or scary (assuming the shaky camera didn't make you sick).
The sequel Book of Shadows, on the other hand, was an absolute mess - mostly replacing the found footage content with a nonsensical plot and more than a few unanswered questions.
I've not yet seen the third film, but I'm not fussed about seeing it.

3. Taken: The story of a former CIA agent who travels to Paris to rescue his daughter after she's kidnapped by Albanian sex traffickers was a simplistic film yet one I legitimately enjoyed - despite initially not wanting to watch it. Sadly, the sequels took that premise and really stretched it beyond what could be done with it.

4. Jaws: This award-winning story of a Great White shark terrorizing a seaside town has gained legendary status. The same can't be said for the sequels, though, as the suspense of the original is almost instantly lost. Jaws 2 was decent, Jaws 3 was awful and the only part of Jaws: The Revenge that I liked was hearing Michael Caine's character - especially when you hear him say "Oh S**t!" when the shark went after him.


5. Dragonheart: A medieval tale of a knight/dragon slayer teaming up with the last dragon to take down an evil king. I loved this film both as a child and as an adult, and it wrapped up reasonably well. However, we've had 3 more direct-to-DVD films since then (Dragonheart: A New Beginning, Dragonheart 3: The Sorcerer's Curse and recently Dragonheart 4: Battle for the Heartfire). Worse still, a 5th film is in the works.
 
Last edited:
The Jungle Book, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Aladdin, etc.
Disney movies in general, though there have been a few good ones (*cough*FindingDory*cough*)
 
The Terminator series; they should have stopped at Judgment Day, and Salvation was most definitely a snoozefest.
 
The original Robocop from 1987, the original was a classic, then they ruined it by releasing Robocop 2, which had all of the violence and bad words and none of the story IMO, and let's not even talk about Robocop 3, which had all of the violence removed to get a 12 age rating.

Gremlins (1984), OK Gremlins 2 wasn't terrible for what it was, but did the classic original really NEED a sequel? And apparently they're doing Gremlins 3 at some point.
 
The Matrix was incredible. Alien and The Godfather both had great followups and disastrous third entries.
 
AGXStarseed said:
It's no secret that a fair number of movies that prove to be hits at the box office and/or popular enough will find themselves getting one or more sequels.
However, I think most of us will agree that some of those movies really did not need sequels.

Are there any movies you've watched that got sequels you didn't think were necessary?

Here's a few from me:

...
Click to expand...

Your list so mirrors mine that I couldn't think of anything to add to it right away.

Then I remembered the Die Hard series. John McClain should never leave home - period. He is a $hit-magnet.
 
Rich Allen said:
Gremlins (1984), OK Gremlins 2 wasn't terrible for what it was, but did the classic original really NEED a sequel? And apparently they're doing Gremlins 3 at some point.
Click to expand...

I actually loved both Gremlins movies and think a sequel could be awesome if done right, but I am also so rarely of like mind with others, even on these forums, that I just assume from the outset that mine is a minority view, lol.
 
It's not out yet but Top Gun doesn't need a sequel although it's in the works. Grease (70s) did not need a sequel and it was BAD!!!!! What I really don't like is remakes of great movies - Footloose, Dirty Dancing, the list could go on and on.
 
An extra one from me:

The Exorcist: Based on the book of the same name by William Peter Blatty, this is often regarded as one of the scariest and most well-made films of all time. It's first sequel, however - Exorcist II: The Heretic - is instead regarded as one of the worse films of all time. Apparently there was a story that after 10 minutes of viewing the film, audience members were so angry that they chased Warner Bros. executives down the street in anger at how bad it was.
The third film (directed by William Blatty himself) and the prequels ignored the 2nd film and Exorcist III did make up for some of its mistakes, but ultimately all the follow up films to the first Exorcist weren't well received and weren't needed.
 
In contrast, series books are some of the best ways to enjoy the same characters and reading experience. A good detective series, or action hero thriller series, can run for decades.

I don't know why movies can't figure that out.
 
How about some of these fourteen billion XMen and Marvell movies they have now? It's really starting to feel like they're just trying to squeeze every penny they can out of them. I can't even remember which ones I liked at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom