- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,996
- Real Name
- Sam Favate
My biggest problem with many sequels is that they tend to parody the original. Very often, the idea of showing audiences the characters they know and love from the first film becomes an excuse for silliness and we find ourselves laughing when what we should be feeling is dramatic tension (assuming it's a drama or an adventure). Temple of Doom and Return of the Jedi are guilty in this regard, but I wouldn't call them the worst sequels ever (although they're not good.) Many of the James Bond films are guilty of that too (A View To A Kill comes to mind.)
There's a special place in movie hell for Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, but I think the worst sequel ever made - and very possibly the worst movie ever made - is Mission Impossible 2. That one is full of every cliche in movie history. Some movies are so bad that you laugh at them, while others are so bad you just slap your forehead and say "Oh come on!" By the time MI2 got to the slo-mo scene where Cruise walks through a fireball and a dove flies out, I was doing just that.
But MI2 isn't a sequel in the traditional sense, but rather in the modern sense. In the traditional sense, the sequel had something to do with the story or the characters of the original (the way Beneath the Planet of the Apes followed the first film, or the way Star Trek III followed II, etc.). In modern sense, a sequel, such as MI2, is simply a generic action movie with a brand name slapped on it. As poor as some sequels have been in movie history, at least they weren't the hollow, empty vessels that are made now and tagged with a familiar name and new number.
There's a special place in movie hell for Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, but I think the worst sequel ever made - and very possibly the worst movie ever made - is Mission Impossible 2. That one is full of every cliche in movie history. Some movies are so bad that you laugh at them, while others are so bad you just slap your forehead and say "Oh come on!" By the time MI2 got to the slo-mo scene where Cruise walks through a fireball and a dove flies out, I was doing just that.
But MI2 isn't a sequel in the traditional sense, but rather in the modern sense. In the traditional sense, the sequel had something to do with the story or the characters of the original (the way Beneath the Planet of the Apes followed the first film, or the way Star Trek III followed II, etc.). In modern sense, a sequel, such as MI2, is simply a generic action movie with a brand name slapped on it. As poor as some sequels have been in movie history, at least they weren't the hollow, empty vessels that are made now and tagged with a familiar name and new number.
