Ever seen a bad movie sequel? A while back I was excited to see a sequel to a movie that was really good ( the first one) but was disappointing when saw it. It looked like it was just slapped together and found it really annoying. Anyone else experience this?
There have been a lot of bad remakes and movie sequels in the past 20 years or so. The 1998 film "Godzilla", from the makers of "Independence Day", was just awful. The current remake in 2014, however, is fantastic. The Star Trek sequels, "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier", and "Star Trek: Insurrection" are two more examples of terrible sequels. They are awful in so many ways I wouldn't have the space here to fully describe it. The same applies for the George Clooney-starring Batman film, "Batman & Robin". That one may be probably my most-hated movie sequel as there isn't a single thing about it that makes it worth watching. On the other hand, I also don't have much good to say about a movie prequel, most notably the 1999 film "Star Wars - Episode 1: The Phantom Menace". Bad acting, boring story - that basically sums it up. Then you also have the lame sequel to "Jurassic Park", known as "Jurassic Park: The Lost World". It lacked the wonder and awe in regards to the dinosaurs, and I couldn't stand the character of Ian Malcolm's daughter in it (or the bad actress who played her). But perhaps one of the most glaring examples of a terrible, horrible film sequel is "Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull". Where are the words to fully sum up just how bad a movie it is? The acting was terrible (i.e. Shia LeBouf, Karen Allen, and even Harrison Ford in parts). The story was uninteresting and absurd, and there was far too much silliness in it to make it worthwhile or even modest entertainment.
The matrix trilogy was pretty bad for me. I absolutely loved the first one I thought the story was amazing acting was great and the characters really drew me in. By the time we got to the third one I felt as though it really did not link in with anything from the beginning. The story had become too complex for me to understand. The graphics were not as good the action was a bit over the top. Really the story for me was lost and without the story there is nothing for me. In my books it was the worst sequel. Especially coming from an amazing first movie
The Shrek movies after the second one were atrocious. Standalone, they are good movies, but what made these movies so heinous were how far they jumped from the original storylines. The first movie was brilliant, the second movie was one of the best sequels I have ever seen. Frankly, they should have stopped there. In trying to remain relatable, they introduced a cornucopia of new characters and storylines that left the movies a befuddled mess, albeit with some shining (and downright hilarious moments- one tea party scene comes to mind.)
I agree that the last Indiana Jones movie was a dud! The movie was completely ruined with the alien plot line. If the producers would have chosen another culture's icon, it would have been so much better. Since when does Mr Jones deal with aliens? Also, the second and third movies in the Men in Black series were poorly done. The first Men in Black with Will Smith was good, but the others bombed.
The most recent one I was disappointed by was X-Men: Days of Future Past. I wouldn't consider it completely bad since there were some moments I liked here and there, but I thought that it was just not as cohesive and well put together as the first one, and with the success of First Class, I was really hoping that they continue on with that direction in terms of building up the team from the ground up instead of just re-using Wolverine again for the thousandth time.
Really? Are we talking the latest one, or the 1998 version? Because I've heard only good things about the latest one and I'm looking forward to checking it out myself due to that.
Have you seen all the originals and original sequels? GODZILLA (in the 90's) was a BIG improvement on those Well, RELOADED kinda 'raised' the story to 'trilogy-quality' (like V (5) of STAR WARS), and so REVOLUTIONS served to bring the thing full-circle. It's one of those things (like sex) that gets really hyped-up and that--after you've experienced it and know what's going on--you find out isn't quite the thrill you were hoping for. It's 'like X-MEN, but this time with TIME-TRAVEL!' They ought to do one of those MOVIE-movies (like with SCARY MOVIE 1-5, EPIC MOVIE, DATE MOVIE, etc.) called something-like REGULAR MOVIE, BUT THIS TIME WITH TIME-TRAVEL!
I think the worst movie sequel I've seen was the sequel to The Mask. I think it's called Son of the Mask and it's just atrocious. If you've seen The Mask you know how great a movie it is, hilarious throughout and a great Jim Carey performance. Then for some reason they decided to do a sequel years later and it's completely terrible.
Most movie sequels just, are, bad. Look at what they did to Shrek . . . If I were to list the number of bad sequels that I've seen, then it would be quite a lengthy list starting with Terminator 2 all the way down to Grown Ups 2 [disgusting movie it was]. The worst of them all [the bad sequels that is] has to be Alien vs Predator Requiem.
You have literally read my mind! Oh goodness I remember the travesty that was Batman & Robin with George Clooney. It was so painful and I was bored out of my mind. Please don't remind me of the 1998 film Godzilla. I felt like I was being torture the entire time. Also, I didn't like Spider-Man 3 with Toby Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. Right now I am enjoying The Hunger Games films and Catching Fire was better than the first film. I hope Mocking Jay doesn't disappoint me.
Jaws is one of my favorite movies ever but the following 3 paled in comparison and honestly, they probably should have just stopped at two movies. I also love Jurassic Park but I can't even stand to watch the sequel, however, I do love the third movie in the franchise. A pet peeve of mine is when a sequel comes out and its the same characters but different actors. The Prince and Me, for example, was a very cute, fun movie but the sequel was unnecessary. Then, they had to go and make it even worse by only bringing back one of the main stars. The chemistry was just not the same in the second movie and it definitely showed. Another prime example of this is Speed and Speed 2. Speed 2 really would have been an alright movie had they bothered to wait until the could actually get Keanu Reeves to reprise his role. I love sequels but only if they are done right and oftentimes, they are not.
I don't know about you guys but the TRANSFORMERS sequel was the worst for me. Since maybe you guys haven't watched the new one, I wouldn't be a spoiler. It just irritates me that an already rich man, Michael Bay, would stoop so low just to get more money! Why not just create an EPIC movie for everyone to appreciate and not make a movie just for the sake of the money? People are smart and they would watch/buy the movie if it was great! I don't know, Transformers let me down. That's just my opinion.
Transformers (Michael Bay) movies has always been a pain for me to watch. When I first watched the 2007 hit I thought it was really bad, but when the second film was released, I had my hopes high since the first film has some potential of redeeming itself and Michael Bay might've learned from his mistakes in the first film, but no. It was the same recycled crap from the first movie. And then the third movie came out and that time I'm pretty sure Bay would've gotten it right this time, I mean come on, after 2 horrible movies it's only right to correct the mistakes in the first two films. But what do you know, the third film is the same as the first two films. And then last week, I don't know why I bothered throwing money on Bay for the fourth time, but I have a little bit of hope that the fourth film should at least be good, I mean, four films and if you still screw this up like the first three movies then it just goes to show that Michael Bay is a horrible director. Turns out he is.
I've seen far too many terrible movie sequels to count anymore. So many sequels are subpar these days, but I'll still probably watch them for something to do at the time, you know? I mean, I'll use it as a sort of background noise film if that makes sense?
Was that the one where they went into how The Mask was actually inhabited by the Norse god Loki (the trickster god)? I agree that it didn't pull off the same kind of good that the Jim Carrey feature delivered (Jay Mohr is 'good,' but not quite "Jim Carrey")--I don't even remember the 'plot'--but I did remember Loki!
I totally agree with you on this. I've seen this movie with my friends and I immediately regretted the decision of seeing it on the theaters as soon as it hit the 15 minute mark. I don't understand why Michael Bay doesn't want to make anything great out of the franchise, or better yet, hire a better director for the film. The movie has all the good elements of a good action film and all it needs is a great director to lead it into the good path. I hope the next movie is great.
And now he's doing Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. I think that movie helps show the way to take Michael Bay-movies---as a kind of joke running through his head, a kind of 'Hey! This would be neato if they made it into a movie!' And apparently his movies typically 'put him in the black' (as opposed to 'the red' one would expect a bad movie-maker to be drowning in). So I guess that 'whatever he lacks in movie-craft' he makes-up-for with marketing!
Interesting point about Jurassic Park, I think I'll have to watch the third one then. Since the second one was so terrible, I didn't even bother with the third one, I just ignored it. What in the movie makes it redeemable and worth watching?
