| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/10 |
| 2004/6/8 [Recreation/Media] UID:30678 Activity:insanely high |
6/8 Movies where the sequel was better than the original
\_ Road Warrior
\_ definitely
\_ thats not really fair. the original was filmed on a dime with
a bunch of no names, including the lead at the time.
\_ so what? I wasn't insulting Mad Max, I was saying Road
Warrior is *better*. I think Road Warrior is one of the best
movies ever.
\_ Empire Strikes Back
\_ Attack of the Clones (I thought it was better than Menace anyway.
but I'm not sure Menace counts as an original for this purpose.)
\_ I dunno, AotC was pretty freakin' bad.
\_ TPM was worse. Lots of boredom and Jar Jar antics. AotC
entertained me.
\_ Shrek 2
\_ you are definitely kidding
\_ nope.
\_ I like Shrek 2 more.
\_ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4999152
\_ T2: Judgement Day
\_ I think you might be a couple of cans short of a six pack.
\_ dumb fucking kid.
\_ Nope, T1 was better. T2 had better special effects but had
a lame slow section (desert), too preachy, annoying kid, a
badd-a** T-800 saying lame things like "I cannot cry". T1
had Arnold in his true form, an evil robot willing to
destroy anything in it's way.
\_ Thinking of T2, does anyone remember how he shot the shotgun
while riding the motorcycle? Which hand did he use? (Thought
of this yesterday for some reason while riding my motorbike,
and was wondering about the logistics of it - must have been
the left hand, right? Would still need a hand on the throttle?)
\_ some bigger bikes (cop bikes?) have a mechanical cruise
control.
\_ Godfather. BTW, this was a question asked in one of the Scream
movies.
\_ scream 2?
\_ Aliens
\_ apples oranges
\_ ??
\_ ie, two completely different movies, one horror, one action
\_ Aliens is still a sequel, and still better.
\_ Blah, the second one is just your standard alien bug
hunt. A waste of film. It had one or two good lines
and the rest was trash. "Oh, look, a hundred more big
alien bugs with drooling jaws running on ceiling,
floor, and wall. Blast 'em. Next!"
\_ as opposed to the hundreds of alien bug hunt movies
that came before it, right?
\_ agreed. previous poster is lame. Aliens is
the standard bug hunt movie, and still the
best, IMO. But now I feel like a total nerd-
boy L053R by participating in this thread.
\_ Kill Bill 2
\_ Me and several friends disagree completely.
\_ But it really is just one (too) long movie.
\_ KB2? Big yawner. It was just like the first except it had no
real action, no cool moves, no cool lines, and took far too
long for the closing credits to finally show up. Other than
that it was a better movie.
\_ I cheat: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?GoodMovieSequels
\_ Man, this page beat me on X-Men/X-Men 2
\_ Die Harder (Die Hard 2)
\- this is a troll. Die Hard was an actually good action flic.
Die hard 2 blew chunks.
\_ what you really mean is Die Hard 3 blew chunks.
\_ I'm not sure if you can call everything you disagree
with a troll.
\_ Oh, I'm pretty sure he can.
\_ You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means.
\_ Die Hard is good, but Die Hard 2 is as good or better.
\_ I may have been thinking of Die Hard 3. Which one was in
an airport? If it was 3 then i don't remember 2.
\_ I don't think the "better" judgment is generally valid.
Die Hard was a classic, spawning lots of imitations (it's
"Die Hard" on a $NOUN!). For me anyway Die Hard 2 wasn't
nearly as memorable. Not that I love Die Hard.
\- Passion of the Christ
\_ There was a second one? When did I miss it?
\_ Rush Hour 2
\_ Urusei Yatsura 2: Beautiful Dreamer
\_ Damn straight!
\_ Toy Story 2
\_ Evil Dead 2
\_ Urotsukidoji 2: Legend of the Demon Womb
\_ Naked Gun 2 1/2
\_ Wrath of Khan
\_ KAAAAHHHHNNN!
\_ Austin Powers
\_ we're not talking about sequels that sucked more |
| 7/10 |
|
| www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4999152 AT THE MOVIES Shrek 2' is the rare sequel that succeeds Myers and Diaz meet the parents in this charming film Shrek DreamWorks via Reuters Mike Myers provides the voice for "Shrek" REVIEW By Christy Lemire The Associated Press Updated: 9:55 am ET May 24, 2004 Whatever was wrong with "Shrek" -- and there were more weaknesses than its beloved status would suggest -- has been eradicated or improved upon with "Shrek 2," a rare example of a sequel that's better than the original. The computer-generated animation, which dazzled the first time in 2001, looks even better. The backgrounds and landscapes are even more lush and detailed, from the realistic drops of water during a thunderstorm to the contours left in the snow after a horse-drawn carriage has rumbled through. The characters' movements are smoother, not as herky-jerky -- especially those of Princess Fiona (voiced by Cameron Diaz) -- all of which contributes to the sensation of watching something truly filmic, not digitally manufactured. But the most important change of all, and the most fundamental, is in the screenplay. While the "Shrek" script consisted of little more than a litany of pop culture references, many of which already felt stale, "Shrek 2" has a strong story line, with more fully developed characters. com The in-jokes that do exist here seem relevant, including a clever little reference to Justin Timberlake, Diaz's real-life beau. A send-up of "COPS" -- called "KNIGHTS," in keeping with the fairy-tale theme -- is a fast-paced, dead-on riot. Other pop culture references -- to movie musicals, Beverly Hills cliches and old Hollywood -- seem classic and more likely to withstand the test of time, unlike those in the first "Shrek," which included tired takeoffs on "The Matrix" and the Macarena. These, of course, are intended to entertain the adults in the audience -- and they'll succeed -- but there's plenty to keep the kids happy, too. "Shrek 2," like the first, is bright, light and colorful, with a nonstop energy that's infectious. Several strong supporting characters and actors have been added to the already-solid lineup of returning vocal talent, led by Diaz, Mike Myers as the lovable ogre, Shrek, and Eddie Murphy as his perpetually perky sidekick, Donkey. Picking up right where the original left off, "Shrek 2" begins with the newly married ogre couple returning from their honeymoon and receiving an invitation to visit Princess Fiona's parents, King Harold (John Cleese) and Queen Lillian (Julie Andrews), who rule over the kingdom of Far, Far Away. Voiceovers the loneliest job in Hollywood Upon first meeting the boorish Shrek, the in-laws don't exactly approve. While the queen eventually tries to be conciliatory, the king and Shrek get into a passive-aggressive shouting match over dinner in which they tear apart all the food on the table (and each other, almost). Meanwhile, Fiona's fairy godmother (voiced decadently by Jennifer Saunders from "Absolutely Fabulous") is astonished to learn that the princess has gotten married. Her son, the self-obsessed, blond-tressed Prince Charming (Rupert Everett), was supposed to have rescued Fiona from the tower and lived happily ever after with her -- but he got there too late. This brings us to the most fantastic addition of all to the "Shrek" series: Puss-in-Boots, a tabby cat decked out in tiny Zorro duds and voiced by Antonio Banderas, in a nod to his starring role in "The Mask of Zorro" in 1998. Puss-in-Boots is sent to take out Shrek, which would make way for a fairy-tale ending for Fiona and Prince Charming. Instead, the kitty ends up warming to the big green guy and fighting on his side, even after Shrek has undergone a medieval version of "Extreme Makeover," thinking that's what Fiona really wants in a husband. The character alternates with catlike agility between sword-fighting bravado and saucer-eyed vulnerability, and Banderas plays him with a sexual ambiguity that adds a hilariously subversive layer of humor to the film. You could easily imagine him slashing and purring his way to his own movie. The moral of the story -- that love conquers all, despite appearances -- is the same as the first movie. Even that element is conveyed with a lighter touch this time, something that seems unlikely in a film with three directors and about a half-dozen screenwriters. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
| c2.com/cgi/wiki?GoodMovieSequels StarTrekMovies, a rule of thumb is that the even-numbered movies are good and the odd-numbered movies are bad. The most prevalent pattern is that no sequel is anywhere near as good as the original. Some exceptions are: * Godfather -- Good + Godfather II -- Some say better. StarWars (IV) -- Good + Empire Strikes Back -- Some say better. Difficult to watch without wincing at how horrible it is. Personally I liked it better than ROTJ - when I watch ROTJ now, nostalgia aside, it's just ok. It would have been okay except for the plot, characters, dialogue and acting. Sequels that follow the rule of worsening movie sequels: * Back to the Future -- Good + Back to the Future 2 -- Almost as good. Too dark + Back to the Future 3 -- Worse than 3, but still OK * Die Hard -- Good + Die Hard 2 -- Good. Completely implausible and ridiculous + Die Hard 3 -- Not very good Mindless fun. One of the worst movies ever made, worse than Plan 9 from Outer Space + Highlander 3 -- *gasp* Good * First Blood -- not bad + Rambo: First Blood Part II -- not as thoughtful as first movie, but a good action flick + Rambo III -- bad * The Matrix -- great + Matrix Reloaded -- awful Ok Hah, but you admit it's nowhere near as good as the first. Jaws, Charlie's Angels (not that the first one was very good), .... In general, sequels are better than the original only if they are significantly different. For example, Alien is a horror film, and Aliens is an action film. The Godfather, Part II and The Empire Strikes Back are both much more serious and dark than their predecessors. Note that this doesn't hold true for the Terminator series. Terminator II was a heavy-handed movie preaching about the perils of nuclear war. Unfortunately, most directors want to duplicate the success of their first movie by using the same recipe. |