Film sequels you love that no-one else seems to

[Neb Lleb]

We all have those movies we love that have a mixed or a negative consensus, but some of those movies just so happen to be sequels. So, I figured why not start a thread about it?

I'll kick things off here, and I do have a fair few sequels I love that no-one else does, such as Predator 2, The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions, and Alien 3 (I even consider Predator 2 an even better followup to an already fantastic first outing). But those are too obvious, so instead, I'll start with one I recently rewatched... Die Hard 2.

Yes, it's a shameless rehash of the first's plot. Yes, it's highly dependent on a misunderstanding of how airports work. And yes, it's fully aware of all these things and it just wants you to have as much fun as humanly possible with John McClane as he ends up becoming the fly in the proverbial ointment again. Unlike John McTiernan's iconic classic, Renny Harlin's followup takes itself far less seriously with a subtle sense of humour and in your face self awareness to the proceedings that help make it stand out of the shadow of its predecessor. The dialogue here is some of the best I've seen, the action is jawdropping, the sense of escalation in the plot is nailed again, and the choice to followup a band of armed master thieves taking an LA skyscraper during a Christmas party with a massive conspiracy to free a South American dictator using a Washington airport during the Christmas landing rush is a perfect way to raise the stakes from last time.

Really, the reason why it's brushed aside as "a lazy rehash" and overlooked by Die Hard fans in favour of its successors, Die Hard with a Vengeance and Live Free or Die Hard*, is because of the fact that it reuses the formula of part one at a time when 'Die Hard on an X' films like Under Siege and Speed were becoming all the rage. But I personally couldn't care less.

*YES, there were only four Die Hard movies. Nothing happened after Live Free. Don't look any further into it.

 

[Xold 01]

We all have those movies we love that have a mixed or a negative consensus, but some of those movies just so happen to be sequels. So, I figured why not start a thread about it?

I'll kick things off here, and I do have a fair few sequels I love that no-one else does, such as Predator 2, The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions, and Alien 3 (I even consider Predator 2 an even better followup to an already fantastic first outing). But those are too obvious, so instead, I'll start with one I recently rewatched... Die Hard 2.
View attachment 139230
Yes, it's a shameless rehash of the first's plot. Yes, it's highly dependent on a misunderstanding of how airports work. And yes, it's fully aware of all these things and it just wants you to have as much fun as humanly possible with John McClane as he ends up becoming the fly in the proverbial ointment again. Unlike John McTiernan's iconic classic, Renny Harlin's followup takes itself far less seriously with a subtle sense of humour and in your face self awareness to the proceedings that help make it stand out of the shadow of its predecessor. The dialogue here is some of the best I've seen, the action is jawdropping, the sense of escalation in the plot is nailed again, and the choice to followup a band of armed master thieves taking an LA skyscraper during a Christmas party with a massive conspiracy to free a South American dictator using a Washington airport during the Christmas landing rush is a perfect way to raise the stakes from last time.

Really, the reason why it's brushed aside as "a lazy rehash" and overlooked by Die Hard fans in favour of its successors, Die Hard with a Vengeance and Live Free or Die Hard*, is because of the fact that it reuses the formula of part one at a time when 'Die Hard on an X' films like Under Siege and Speed were becoming all the rage. But I personally couldn't care less.

*YES, there were only four Die Hard movies. Nothing happened after Live Free. Don't look any further into it.

Toy story 2 t's a great movie.

 

[Neb Lleb]

Toy story 2 t's a great movie.

I agree. Like Die Hard 2, it's often overlooked in favour of the third film, but it's still a worthy, hilarious little film.


"BUT I DON'T WANNA USE MY HEAD!"

 

[Xold 01]

Concordo. Assim como Duro de Matar 2, ele costuma ser deixado de lado em favor do terceiro filme, mas ainda assim é um filme curto, hilário e que vale a pena assistir.


"MAS EU NÃO QUERO USAR A CABEÇA!"

OThe movie is very good, the problem is that everyone only remembers the third one, which in the second one presents characters with a deep story.There are several things that were in the DVD's bonus material.

 

[bjork]

I don't know how beloved it is but I'll say Return to Oz. Creepy ass movie but I remember liking it when I saw it.

 

[Neb Lleb]

I don't know how beloved it is but I'll say Return to Oz. Creepy ass movie but I remember liking it when I saw it.

Doesn't count, it was made as a more faithful adaption of the Oz books, and it's also fairly beloved.

 

[bjork]

Doesn't count, it was made as a more faithful adaption of the Oz books, and it's also fairly beloved.

Would you please give me a list of titles that you deem appropriate for this exercise

 

[Neb Lleb]

Would you please give me a list of titles that you deem appropriate for this exercise

Basically, if a film was made with the intent of being a continuation of an earlier work and wound up polarising viewers in one form or another. I'm not talking about adaptations of a beloved property that borrow elements from another, such as Return to Oz.

 

[sijaab]

cars 2

 

[bjork]

Basically, if a film was made with the intent of being a continuation of an earlier work and wound up polarising viewers in one form or another. I'm not talking about adaptations of a beloved property that borrow elements from another, such as Return to Oz.

I know people who were traumatized by Return to Oz as kids and it's referred to in multiple places as being an unofficial sequel, but ok I guess.

 

[Badseed Badseed]

Everyone rags on this movie. I think it's good. Maybe I'm just watching for Kristanna Loken's tight get-up.

 

[Mopeybloke]

There is some silver-lining in the mushroom cloud that is Highlander 2, and the film is kind of funny, but I don't love it.

I think I also enjoy Matrix Revolutions quite a bit, but not so the 3rd one. It's been over a decade since I rewatched any.

 

[Ikagura]

View attachment 139383

Everyone rags on this movie. I think it's good. Maybe I'm just watching for Kristanna Loken's tight get-up.

View attachment 139384

There's a fanmade cut that basically fixed many issues and while it's not on the level as the first two it's the definitive way to enjoy it imo.

I still prefer the fourth movie and I think that Genysis and Dark Fates are too much and retconned for nothing (and to be honest my favourite is still the original from '84, the rest is superfluous).

 

[Bakuma1997]

I non ironically liked Tron Ares, i've never seen the classic one, but i kind of loved the "New" one and its concept of reality being invaded by the cyberworld felt like watching a Megaman NT movie, only flaw i found was Jared Leto and that's merely a bad tase of his Joker

 

[Sumer Singh]

While not hated, I think I am one of the few Back to the future fans, who thinks the third film is the best in the trilogy

 

[Neb Lleb]

While not hated, I think I am one of the few Back to the future fans, who thinks the third film is the best in the trilogy

View attachment 140106

Part III was, no joke, the better of the two Back to the Future sequels. II was great, but I wouldn't be lying if I said that its darker nature and the Biffhorrific 1985 makes it very jarring after a first film that took a light hearted approach to time travel concepts. Part III returns to the lighter approach, adds to it with themes of cause and effect, and also provides a really satisfactory resolution to plot threads from its predecessors.

"Remember: The Future is what you make it!"

 

[BrawlMan]

Megan 2.0. It bombed in theaters, but I find it a much better film than the first film. The first film is fine, but I didn't find it scary. Them going into the T2 direction was the best and most practical decision. They took a light sci fi-horror film, and turned into a full blow action film. There is actual character development, carried from the first movie, an important lesson on the use of AI and technology. I still got to pick this up later. I think there is a sale on the steel book edition of Megan 2.0.

​

 

[BrawlMan]

How about... HELL NO?!

Nope. The movie impressed me and I had a great time. I will be watching it more than the first movie. Just so we're clear, there is no actual time travel. I meant T2 as in the bad guy from the previous film, becomes the good guy/anti-hero and faces someone much worse and deadlier than them. The only difference it's the same Megan from the first film, and I love how the develop her, Gemma, and Cady. The sequel does uplift the first film for me, and makes it bit better by retrospect, but I still prefer the second movie and consider it the best of the two. Better it ends this way, then milking another slasher fest that goes on for a near decade with diminishing returns.

 

[Thilom593]

Todos nós temos aqueles filmes que adoramos, mas que recebem críticas mistas ou negativas, e alguns desses filmes por acaso são sequências. Então, pensei: por que não criar um tópico sobre isso?

Para começar, tenho algumas sequências favoritas que ninguém mais gosta, como Predador 2, Matrix Reloaded e Revolutions, e Alien 3 (considero Predador 2 uma continuação ainda melhor do que o primeiro filme, que já era fantástico). Mas essas são óbvias demais, então vou começar com uma que revi recentemente: Duro de Matar 2.
View attachment 139230
Sim, é uma repetição descarada da trama do primeiro filme. Sim, depende muito de um mal-entendido sobre como os aeroportos funcionam. E sim, está plenamente ciente de tudo isso e só quer que você se divirta ao máximo com John McClane, que acaba se tornando novamente a pedra no sapato. Ao contrário do clássico icônico de John McTiernan, a sequência de Renny Harlin se leva muito menos a sério, com um humor sutil e uma autoconsciência explícita que a ajudam a se destacar da sombra de seu antecessor. Os diálogos estão entre os melhores que já vi, a ação é de tirar o fôlego, a escalada da trama é executada com perfeição, e a escolha de dar sequência à invasão de um arranha-céu de Los Angeles por um grupo de ladrões armados durante uma festa de Natal com uma enorme conspiração para libertar um ditador sul-americano usando um aeroporto de Washington durante o pico de voos de Natal é uma maneira perfeita de elevar a tensão em relação ao filme anterior.

Na verdade, o motivo pelo qual é descartado como "uma repetição preguiçosa" e ignorado pelos fãs de Duro de Matar em favor de seus sucessores, Duro de Matar: A Vingança e Duro de Matar 4.0*, é porque reutiliza a fórmula do primeiro filme numa época em que filmes "Duro de Matar turbinado", como Under Siege e Velocidade Máxima, estavam fazendo o maior sucesso. Mas, pessoalmente, isso não me incomoda nem um pouco.

Sim, só houve quatro filmes de Duro de Matar. Nada aconteceu depois de Duro de Matar 4.0. Não procure mais informações sobre isso.

As Crônicas de Nárnia, eu simplesmente sou apaixonado por essa saga e quero muito ler os livros para entender melhor a história. As Crônicas de Nárnia marcou a minha infância e fiquei muito feliz quando os atores se encontraram recentemente junto com o ator que faz o Edmundo

 

[Ezri_Muldoon]

2010: The year we made contact.

Not only was it more faithful Clarke's novels (Though it did remove the Chinese Tsien's Europa landing) It went out of its away to explain every plot contrivance found in the 2001: A space odyssey with a logical answer.

Which is why people hated it upon its release.
It removed the ambiguity and even humanised Hal as a misunderstood sympathetic antagonist.
Instead of getting an adaptation of 2061: Odyssey three we still have no continuation due to 2010's reception.
Not that I would trust Modern Hollywood with any of Clarke's works.

 

[thumbsdown]

2010: The year we made contact.

Not only was it more faithful Clarke's novels (Though it did remove the Chinese Tsien's Europa landing) It went out of its away to explain every plot contrivance found in the 2001: A space odyssey with a logical answer.

Which is why people hated it upon its release.
It removed the ambiguity and even humanised Hal as a misunderstood sympathetic antagonist.
Instead of getting an adaptation of 2061: Odyssey three we still have no continuation due to 2010's reception.
Not that I would trust Modern Hollywood with any of Clarke's works.

I hardly like sequels, but this is such an exception

 

[Neb Lleb]

I hardly like sequels, but this is such an exception

I've always placed 2001 and 2010 on my need-to-watch list.

 

[Demonlover]

I'm a firm defender of the Critters saga, including the third and fourth.

 

[Xdqwerty Xdqwerty]

Maybe shrek the third and back to the future part 3 and cloudy with a chance of meatballs 2

 

[Pokenami's icon Pokenami Pokenami]

Speed 2: Cruise Control was a lot more fun than the first movie was.

God bless Willem Dafoe