The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ok I’ll be precise and to the point. I’m not a sequels fan. In fact I pretty much hate them. I don’t mind some of them. Terminator 2 was good and the sequels to Star Wars were good. However, none of the sequels that have been made in the last 5 years do I rate as being as good as the original.
Let me take the scream trilogy for example. The first received great reviews and was being hailed as the start of a new genre. The film was amazingly good. Then came the sequels. I got a sense of déjà vu in almost every scene… it was eventually over and although entertaining just didn’t match the quality of the original. The original had well… been original and this clearly wasn’t. The reviewers picked up on this but it was still a great hit with the people that watched it…. So out came another one… again still entertaining but again still unoriginal. The only differences in these sequels were in each one of the films you didn’t know whom the killer was and were excited to find out who.
It seems that we have come to a time where sequels just aren’t at good. Rate films where the sequels have been better than the original please in this post… Terminator, Godfather and endless more will no doubt pop up or ones I disagree with. Well what do we notice about these films?
We can notice they are what seems made 10ish years ago. I’m only guessing here but I think filmmakers can’t make improvements on the original as they:
a) have to keep lightly to the story of the first (or it won’t be a sequel)
BUT
b) the big problem is they can’t make it look better… Terminators special effects were pretty poor. However, the second films were amazing. The liquid metal man made the film! Without the Liquid Metal Man that film would no way have been better than number 1.
I have recently been horrified to see that a Final Destination 2 is in the making. Final Destination was an amazing film that stunned reviewers and did well at the box office. So to cash in on that films success they are going to make another one. However lets look at this logically. To make Final Destination 2 a sequel they will have to either:
a) Use the same characters with the continuous fight against death. (Basically the same story but continuing on from where the last left off)
OR
b) Take a new set of characters and admit them to a similar scenario
I personally can’t think of any other ways they could do a sequel… so sigh this sequel is destined to be unoriginal and yet another rubbish sequel. I may be proved wrong but I highly doubt it.
Games on the other hand their sequels can get better quite easily – just take the original game and add lots of more features. The thing with films is at the moment the film industry is at a dead end – it can’t enhance it’s special effects and sets as they have the best already.
So stick to one film series I say, forget about sequels just give us a similar formula with different characters.
Let me take the scream trilogy for example. The first received great reviews and was being hailed as the start of a new genre. The film was amazingly good. Then came the sequels. I got a sense of déjà vu in almost every scene… it was eventually over and although entertaining just didn’t match the quality of the original. The original had well… been original and this clearly wasn’t. The reviewers picked up on this but it was still a great hit with the people that watched it…. So out came another one… again still entertaining but again still unoriginal. The only differences in these sequels were in each one of the films you didn’t know whom the killer was and were excited to find out who.
It seems that we have come to a time where sequels just aren’t at good. Rate films where the sequels have been better than the original please in this post… Terminator, Godfather and endless more will no doubt pop up or ones I disagree with. Well what do we notice about these films?
We can notice they are what seems made 10ish years ago. I’m only guessing here but I think filmmakers can’t make improvements on the original as they:
a) have to keep lightly to the story of the first (or it won’t be a sequel)
BUT
b) the big problem is they can’t make it look better… Terminators special effects were pretty poor. However, the second films were amazing. The liquid metal man made the film! Without the Liquid Metal Man that film would no way have been better than number 1.
I have recently been horrified to see that a Final Destination 2 is in the making. Final Destination was an amazing film that stunned reviewers and did well at the box office. So to cash in on that films success they are going to make another one. However lets look at this logically. To make Final Destination 2 a sequel they will have to either:
a) Use the same characters with the continuous fight against death. (Basically the same story but continuing on from where the last left off)
OR
b) Take a new set of characters and admit them to a similar scenario
I personally can’t think of any other ways they could do a sequel… so sigh this sequel is destined to be unoriginal and yet another rubbish sequel. I may be proved wrong but I highly doubt it.
Games on the other hand their sequels can get better quite easily – just take the original game and add lots of more features. The thing with films is at the moment the film industry is at a dead end – it can’t enhance it’s special effects and sets as they have the best already.
So stick to one film series I say, forget about sequels just give us a similar formula with different characters.
Page:
Ok I’ll be precise and to the point. I’m not a sequels fan. In fact I pretty much hate them. I don’t mind some of them. Terminator 2 was good and the sequels to Star Wars were good. However, none of the sequels that have been made in the last 5 years do I rate as being as good as the original.
Let me take the scream trilogy for example. The first received great reviews and was being hailed as the start of a new genre. The film was amazingly good. Then came the sequels. I got a sense of déjà vu in almost every scene… it was eventually over and although entertaining just didn’t match the quality of the original. The original had well… been original and this clearly wasn’t. The reviewers picked up on this but it was still a great hit with the people that watched it…. So out came another one… again still entertaining but again still unoriginal. The only differences in these sequels were in each one of the films you didn’t know whom the killer was and were excited to find out who.
It seems that we have come to a time where sequels just aren’t at good. Rate films where the sequels have been better than the original please in this post… Terminator, Godfather and endless more will no doubt pop up or ones I disagree with. Well what do we notice about these films?
We can notice they are what seems made 10ish years ago. I’m only guessing here but I think filmmakers can’t make improvements on the original as they:
a) have to keep lightly to the story of the first (or it won’t be a sequel)
BUT
b) the big problem is they can’t make it look better… Terminators special effects were pretty poor. However, the second films were amazing. The liquid metal man made the film! Without the Liquid Metal Man that film would no way have been better than number 1.
I have recently been horrified to see that a Final Destination 2 is in the making. Final Destination was an amazing film that stunned reviewers and did well at the box office. So to cash in on that films success they are going to make another one. However lets look at this logically. To make Final Destination 2 a sequel they will have to either:
a) Use the same characters with the continuous fight against death. (Basically the same story but continuing on from where the last left off)
OR
b) Take a new set of characters and admit them to a similar scenario
I personally can’t think of any other ways they could do a sequel… so sigh this sequel is destined to be unoriginal and yet another rubbish sequel. I may be proved wrong but I highly doubt it.
Games on the other hand their sequels can get better quite easily – just take the original game and add lots of more features. The thing with films is at the moment the film industry is at a dead end – it can’t enhance it’s special effects and sets as they have the best already.
So stick to one film series I say, forget about sequels just give us a similar formula with different characters.
Let me take the scream trilogy for example. The first received great reviews and was being hailed as the start of a new genre. The film was amazingly good. Then came the sequels. I got a sense of déjà vu in almost every scene… it was eventually over and although entertaining just didn’t match the quality of the original. The original had well… been original and this clearly wasn’t. The reviewers picked up on this but it was still a great hit with the people that watched it…. So out came another one… again still entertaining but again still unoriginal. The only differences in these sequels were in each one of the films you didn’t know whom the killer was and were excited to find out who.
It seems that we have come to a time where sequels just aren’t at good. Rate films where the sequels have been better than the original please in this post… Terminator, Godfather and endless more will no doubt pop up or ones I disagree with. Well what do we notice about these films?
We can notice they are what seems made 10ish years ago. I’m only guessing here but I think filmmakers can’t make improvements on the original as they:
a) have to keep lightly to the story of the first (or it won’t be a sequel)
BUT
b) the big problem is they can’t make it look better… Terminators special effects were pretty poor. However, the second films were amazing. The liquid metal man made the film! Without the Liquid Metal Man that film would no way have been better than number 1.
I have recently been horrified to see that a Final Destination 2 is in the making. Final Destination was an amazing film that stunned reviewers and did well at the box office. So to cash in on that films success they are going to make another one. However lets look at this logically. To make Final Destination 2 a sequel they will have to either:
a) Use the same characters with the continuous fight against death. (Basically the same story but continuing on from where the last left off)
OR
b) Take a new set of characters and admit them to a similar scenario
I personally can’t think of any other ways they could do a sequel… so sigh this sequel is destined to be unoriginal and yet another rubbish sequel. I may be proved wrong but I highly doubt it.
Games on the other hand their sequels can get better quite easily – just take the original game and add lots of more features. The thing with films is at the moment the film industry is at a dead end – it can’t enhance it’s special effects and sets as they have the best already.
So stick to one film series I say, forget about sequels just give us a similar formula with different characters.
The way I see it Star Wars Episode 1 would have sold well even if it was the worst thing you ever laid your eyes upon. Simply because Star Wars Episodes 4,5 and 6 were brilliant.
Come on feedback! I need feedback!
Come on feedback! I need feedback!
Sorry to sound like a fool but, Star Wars weren't sequels they where a trilogy (ive seen Scream 2 too many times).
Oh and at least if don't get any feedback you can almost gurantee an FAD.
:0P
Oh and at least if don't get any feedback you can almost gurantee an FAD.
:0P
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Sorry to sound like a fool but, Star Wars weren't sequels they where
> a trilogy (ive seen Scream 2 too many times).
lol - yet there was episode 1 so I wasn't sure :/
I guess everyones watching the football.. Hopefully I can catch the end when my homeworks done.
> Sorry to sound like a fool but, Star Wars weren't sequels they where
> a trilogy (ive seen Scream 2 too many times).
lol - yet there was episode 1 so I wasn't sure :/
I guess everyones watching the football.. Hopefully I can catch the end when my homeworks done.
Hollywood doesn't like sequels either. They have such a bad reputation among cinema-goers that many production companies actively avoid putting numbers at the end of film titles. I mean look at the Die Hard series, each one got a sub-title by which it was refered to, instead of Die hard 2 and Die hard 3. You also have variations on titles, such as M:I2 for mission impossible's sequel and the three claw swipes on the third installment of Jurassic Park, instead of the number 3.
By far the best example of avoiding the dreaded sequel is the Madness of King George. This was originally called the Madness of King George IV (or whichever number he was- sorry not up to date on latter-day English monarchs), the film producers were afraid that people would avoid the film fearing it was the 4th part of a franchise about the madness of King George. So there we go. Everyone hates sequels QED. I think there are about four films in living memory where the sequel has been better than the original. One of which was Heat, but that was more of a remake than a sequel.
By far the best example of avoiding the dreaded sequel is the Madness of King George. This was originally called the Madness of King George IV (or whichever number he was- sorry not up to date on latter-day English monarchs), the film producers were afraid that people would avoid the film fearing it was the 4th part of a franchise about the madness of King George. So there we go. Everyone hates sequels QED. I think there are about four films in living memory where the sequel has been better than the original. One of which was Heat, but that was more of a remake than a sequel.
Sequels that are better than the original hmmm let me see,
Terminator 2
Robocop 2 (well i thought it was)
The Godfather 2
ummmmmmm thats about it really.
Im sure one of the Star Trek sequels is better than the original film, I haven't see them so I can't comment.
Terminator 2
Robocop 2 (well i thought it was)
The Godfather 2
ummmmmmm thats about it really.
Im sure one of the Star Trek sequels is better than the original film, I haven't see them so I can't comment.
Ahh thought of another one, Desperados better than El Mariachi. Then again you probably haven't heard of those films so I will shutup. There made by the guy who made From Dusk Till Dawn, Robert Rodriguez.
I've watched both actually, Desparado plus the original. It was quite strange though. My history teacher's dad was the editor of Loaded and as a result my history teacher was actually very cool. He was really into films and making them as well, and he loved both versions of Desperado and so he made us watch them. Then a load of morons joined my set who bought in 'the best films ever made!!!!' ie Bad Boys, Blade and Starship Troopers.
My history teacher did some amazing short films things of his own though. There was a remake of the ear scene from Resevoir dogs, and an incredibly well edited film about university life set to Born Slippy by Underworld. Off the subject but what the hey.
My history teacher did some amazing short films things of his own though. There was a remake of the ear scene from Resevoir dogs, and an incredibly well edited film about university life set to Born Slippy by Underworld. Off the subject but what the hey.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Sequels that are better than the original hmmm let me
> see,
Im sure one of the
> Star Trek sequels is better than the original film, I haven't seen
> them so I can't comment.
Its funny you should say that, its generally accepted even by the most hardened trekkies that ALL of the Star Trek sequels are better than the original (even number 5).
> Sequels that are better than the original hmmm let me
> see,
Im sure one of the
> Star Trek sequels is better than the original film, I haven't seen
> them so I can't comment.
Its funny you should say that, its generally accepted even by the most hardened trekkies that ALL of the Star Trek sequels are better than the original (even number 5).
Page: