What's the most unnecessary movie sequel you can think of?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Xeney : One Thread

102 Dalmatians? Scarlett? The Psycho sequels, all those years after the fact?

I'm looking forward to Blair Witch 2 -- this time I'm not going to try to avoid spoilers, because I think the people who enjoyed the movie the most were the ones who got really into all the hype and backstory before seeing it. But Jurassic 3? Eesh. Who cares?

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000


Urban Legends mystifies me, because the original, as I remember, didn't do anything spectacular at the box office. The original wasn't funny, wasn't scary, and didn't deserve a sequel (one that is to be released in theaters, anyway...after all, I think the video stores all are awaiting Leprechaun XXII.

Highlander: The Quickening is something I'll probably go see (since I liked the TV show fairly well), but I don't understand the reasoning behind it, either. We've had three movies in the Highlander series so far. Part I was kind of fun. Part II made no sense whatsoever (all the immortals were from the...Planet Zeist? What?). Part III ignored everything that happened in Part II. This new movie apparently ignores everything that happened in the previous three. Revisionist history! At least it has Adrian Paul...

Jurassic 3 seems a waste of time, if only for the fact that Stephen Spielberg isn't going to be directing. I didn't like Part II very much, but it was at least well-directed.

Same goes for Terminator III. James Cameron, as of today, is apparently not going to direct (I wonder if he's ever going to direct anything again, or if Titanic, being such a huge success, has scared him about his next project), and I can't see that series doing well under anyone else's leadership.

Of course, I'm hoping the next Star Wars movie is better than the last one, and I'll always go to see Star Trek movies. (Isn't it time for Deep Space Nine and/or Voyager movies by now?) But I'm a geek that way.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

I was going to talk about how hard it is to answer a question like this, simply because you can't ever be sure something will fail the way you expect it to -- the chances are slim, but Jurassic Park 3 could turn out to be immense fun. Even a hypothetical Battlefield Earth 2 would at least be guaranteed to be an improvement on the original movie.

But then I remembered the Highlander sequels, and realized that one can say without fear of reasonable contradiction that films 2-4 and the television series are all utterly worthless and pointless. Not content to be inferior to the first movie, they actually detract from it -- and it wasn't that good to begin with.

What's the catchphrase now? "There can be only...er...well, quite a few, actually"?

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

I seem to have missed closing a tag. Careless of me.

James Cameron, incidentally, is working on a television series called "Dark Angel", about a genetically-enhanced young woman in post- apocalyptic Seattle.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

(You didn't miss the tag; Greenspun just bumped half of it to the next line and put in a space. Happens a lot. I fixed it.)

Every time I see that Dark Angel preview I think, "Wow, Buffy + Angel, starring Faith."

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

For awhile they were going to do Dirty Dancing II. Can you imagine... I mean, what could the story line be for that? Altrustic, sheltered young female again meets wrong side of the tracks boys, but falls in love???

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

Everytime I see the Dark Angel preview, I think, "Mmmmmm....cool ruined Space Needle...." Something about a science- fiction show set in my (adopted) home town makes me smile.

The woman playing the lead (I've forgotten her name) was the female lead in Idle Hands, which was the funniest of the recent horror movie half-spoofs in the vein of Scream and The Faculty.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

While this would be a re-make and not a sequel, it strikes me as so fundamentally wrong that I get dizzy at the mere thought.

I haven't heard that the Dirty Dancing sequel is off -- just that it is being considered by Ricky Martin and Natalie Portman, or at least it was back in May. I have not yet been able to physically summon words to capture how ill this makes me.

And let's all just bow our heads in a moment of silent thanks that Wes Craven seems determined to stop Scream from going beyond a trilogy.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

I have to say, doing a prequel to Road Warrior struck me as the worst movie decision of all time. Then I saw The Postman, which was basically Waterworld on dry land. I consider it a sequel of sorts, and it is the worst that could have happened, or at least until they make Howard the Duck II or Return to Ishtar. I'm sure Warren Beatty is very grateful to Dances with Duds for The Postman.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

I didn't see the sequel, but I don't see how All Dogs Go to Heaven needed one. People have already mentioned Highlander II; Jurassic Park III does need a sequel, if they use it to explain how people died on the boat without being killed by the T-rex (something else must have done it). Titanic doesn't need one, but I bet James Cameron's up for it.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

Patrick, the next Star Trek movie will be with the TNG actors, and there are rumours that they're going to "kill" off Data. The script is being written as we speak. I have mixed feelings about this, since Data was always my fave character (he actually supplanted Spock in my affections), but I certainly understand Brent Spiner's desire to stop playing the character. Besides, it's not like the guy's been hurting for work since the end of the series and needs the money.

You're right, though, it's about time that the DS9 cast started with the movies. Maybe the next one will pass the baton, much like Generations did, but better. (I think Generations wasn't a bad film, just not as good as it could have been. At least it wasn't as bad as Insurrection, which was marginally better than Final Frontier.)

By the way, did ya hear there's talk of another Star Trek series? I love me some Star Trek, but cripes! Time to retire the TV part of the franchise, people!

Jurassic Park 3, hmmm? I really wasn't into the other two, but if it features a shirtless, sweaty Jeff Goldblum (even a torn shirt would be sufficient), I'll rent it on video or see it at the $2.50 theatre. Otherwise, forget it.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

When I am elected Queen of the Universe, no one will be allowed to film any sequels or remake any movies without an extremely, extremely good rationale. Even then, I'll only allow maybe one per year.

And while I'm at it, I'm banning all movies based on TV shows, too.

I'm trying to think of sequels that don't suck, and all I can think of is Godfather, Part II. Okay, maybe The Empire Strikes Back, too. Aliens didn't suck. And wait! How can I forget the Evil Dead sequels -- those are better than the original, even.

When you sit down and think about your favorite movies in the whole wide world, how many of them are sequels or remakes? Be honest. If you can think of more than one or two ... let's face it, you're hopeless. Most of us could live a long life of cinematic enjoyment without sequels in the universe.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

I cast my vote for Highlander 2. I don't think the producers/ directors/writers even SAW the first one. In the third Highlander, they seemed to adopt the stance that the second never existed. Wierd.

I hadn't noticed that the girl in Dark Angel was standing on the ruins of the Needle. I'll have to look more closely next time.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

Species II. I didn't see it, but the first one was *terrible.* As for sequels that haven't (thankfully) been made...can you imagine a Showgirls II? Blech.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

There IS a Showgirls II script. Keri Russell (allegedly) had it for quite a while.


Most pointless sequel to me is Heathers II. Mostly because it has been to long, and because that movie was a really definitive 80's movie, and the sequel, which is rumoured to be the same cast, but in University, would then set the sequel in the 80's as well, and movies about the 80's mindset don't do well at the box office.

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

I am so totally agains a Terminator 3. Terminator 2 ended so very nicely. They averted the apocolypse, and the various Terminators were melted. End of story. Bad future doesn't happen. How can they have a sequel?

I heard for a while they were going to do Sleepless in Seattle 2. Again, why? Why can't they just let us use our imaginations to figure out what happens to Sam and Annie?

As for killing off Data, well, do keep in mind that Brent Spiner is 51. He can't play an un-aging android forever. Data's already looking pretty old. Someday Spiner's going to be old and grey, walking with a cane, and there's no way he'll be able to pull off being Data. How could they write it in?

My friend Krikor has a theory on sequel madness (especially as it pertains to Star Trek):

"Why beat a dead horse, when you can cut it up and sell it for parts?"

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000


-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

"Ended very nicely." How about ended very definitively? I'm tempted to see a theoretical TERMINATOR III just to see how on earth they could possibly find enough wiggle room in that ending just to MAKE a sequel. However, I worry about the lack of direction - and Ah-nold is getting a little old for the part, frankly.

By the by, Jette, that's also my example of a good sequel. Sequels work when they don't try to exactly replicate the formula of the original. The first TERMINATOR is a small, paranoid movie; the second is a large, noisy movie - and they both work. All four ALIEN movies work for me simply because, with the exception of Ripley, you could look at them collectively and not realize they are part of the same universe. Ridley Scott: claustrophobic, well-characterized, paranoid, very creepy. Cameron: loud, militaristic, stirring, but violent. Fincher: Wet, dark, quiet, grim (it ALWAYS rains in David Fincher movies). Jeunet: Slimy, darkly humorous, deviant. (In case you don't remember, Jeunet's most famous movie is DELICATESSEN, but this film owes a lot more to THE CITY OF LOST CHILDREN.)

Ooops, I'm being film-geeky again.

Anyway, I agree that most sequels aren't worth the trouble, and it's usually a bad sign when the original director won't sign on for the sequels, especially if the director was the best thing about the original. (Case in point: Wes Craven, who's actually semi-brilliant at what he does, and the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET sequels.)

But frankly I'd rather discuss projects that don't need to be remade, and those that do, and the ones I can't decide about yet (like BEDAZZLED).

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

Oh, I know Spiner can't play Data forever, or even for another few years. He's not in his late 30's anymore and definitely wasn't looking his best in Insurrection (though the make-up is also at fault, it's just getting worse with each movie). It's purely for selfish reasons that I'm sorry to see him leave. I love me some Spiner.

Earlier today I heard a commercial for Godzilla 2000. I have one word about that: why?

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Columbine: can you say "offsite backups?" Any place with that big and fancy a setup (a vault, for christ's sake) is going to be archiving to tapes in completely separate facilities, probably in a different time zone. Plus, Dyson said all his work was based on the chip, so anything he built has elements of that level of technology.

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Godzilla 2000 is not a sequel, or a remake. It is merely the 26th installment in the serial of Godzilla movies.

Don't mess with my Godzilla.

The japanese version is excellent, btw - I hope the american version holds up as well.

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Godzilla 2000 is a necessary attempt to wipe from our minds the blasphemy that was Roland Emmerich's Godzilla. I can only hope that it succeeds.

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Moderation questions? read the FAQ