|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#22
05-08-2005, 04:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
C'mon...of all the shitty sequels out there....you guys GOTTA be able to think of more.
I got one more too - Lethal Weapon. The first one was great, the second one pretty much on par...the third "ok" but I didn't like it much, and the fourth...y'all KNOW you've done fucked up a movie franchise when you throw Chris Rock into the mix...:rolleyes: 
|
|
#23
05-08-2005, 04:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Beverly Hills cop .. #3 was a huge steaming bowl of green shit.
|
|
#24
05-08-2005, 04:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Agreed on BHC, although I didn't much like the second one either.
Yeah, almost forgot about the ever-increasing presence of Pesci in LW, but, Chris Rock IMO overshadows even him. Another: Les Visiteurs (The visitors) The first one was freakin' hilarious in every way...I've only seen bits and peices of the sequel, but it had sure lost something along the way, it was like a childrens movie. Honestly, the USA remake of the first one was funnier than the "sequel". Of course, I may watch it through to the end one of these days...I could be wrong, but it sure doesn't look like it.
|
|
#25
05-08-2005, 04:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
i didnt know there was a sequal, and i still cant get my hands on the french origional. (i quite liked the american version .. i laugh pretty hard at a few parts - the restaurant especially)
how about the flipside ... movies that have better sequals .. there's a challenge. i can only think of one : Final Destination. (some might argue Blair Witch)
|
|
#26
05-08-2005, 04:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The highlander films, just to clear it up...I'm still going on the original purpose of the thread here...no way in HELL were any of the sequels CLOSE to being as good as the first.
More: From dusk til dawn, spy kids. Last edited by ChEEbA; 05-08-2005 at 04:46 PM.
|
|
#27
05-08-2005, 05:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
dusk til dawn ... well, when the origional director drops the project after the 1st one ... i think the ones that are consistent is (usually) when the same director is involved. has anyone said Batman yet ? or the Prophecy trilogy . or . etc etc.. Horror is the absolute worst genre for it 1) because the genre itself is rife with fans that want more more more 2) the sequals are usually handed over to hacks in the company. They are compitent enough to grind out 85 minutes of something ... the company figures they'll try to come up with some decent artwork and make money on the rentals. Rarely are the sequels of this type theatrically released ..
|
|
#28
05-08-2005, 05:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
48 HRS...Ist was great, second sucked
Mad Max...1st was good, second was better, third....meh...not to big on Thunderdome. Die Hard..1st was great, second pretty good, 3rd not so good Poltergeist ...1st was good, second sucked, I think there was a third...must have sucked.
|
|
#30
05-09-2005, 10:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Oh and since it was mentioned, I have to agree with Highlander. I like the first one quite a bit (Clancy Brown! ;) )But The Quickening is easily one of the worst movies ever made. Which is why I guess they just kind of pretended it didn't exist. :p
|
 |
|
|
