Sequels You Refuse to Acknowledge [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

ThePhantasm

2012-03-29, 09:46 AM

Anybody ever done that with a movie franchise? You watch a particular film (or films) and then see a sequel that is utterly horrible, and you never watch that sequel again, and you generally pretend that it doesn't exist, so that your love for the original story is not tainted by what happened before or after?

For example, the Alien franchise to me is just the first two films: Alien and Aliens (although Prometheus looks promising). The 3rd and 4th film were just horrible. As far as I'm concerned, Ripley, Newt, and Hicks made it safely back to Earth after the events of Aliens.

With Star Wars, I generally pretend the prequels don't exist. I love the originals and I find the prequels to be comparatively... not horrible, but just bland.

Some franchises are easier to do this with than others. Terminator 2, for example, was meant by James Cameron to be the last Terminator film anyway. The story ends there. So it isn't hard to pretend that the 3rd and 4th film never happened.

Do you do this with any franchises in order to free certain films from their lackluster siblings?

Nerd-o-rama

2012-03-29, 09:52 AM

While the Star Wars prequels are pretty mediocre, they don't especially diminish the preceding films like some of your other examples. Now, if I have to choose between the prequels and the Heir to the Empire trilogy when it comes to continuity, I know which ones I'm picking.

As for others, Highlander is an obvious and common choice. I'm also not a big fan of the movie followup to the anime Martian Successor Nadesico. Maybe if they'd made the rest of the sequels they intended to it'd be redeemable but as it stands, it's just a terrible movie that feels completely disconnected from the show in terms of tone and theme. Neat mecha, though.

Yora

2012-03-29, 09:57 AM

Ghost In The Shell: Solid State Society. That movie contradicts and negates everything the series is about. And except for some interesting scenes, it's not even a good movie.
There are certain themes that define all of the manga and animes. Then SSS comes around and says "You know what? That all was really silly. Everything we learned and the insight we gained, it's really not important and let's forget it ever happened."

It's like making a sequel to Lord of the Rings that says "You know, the rings are really not that important. We repair them all and the elves can return back to this world, and then we live again like we used to before Sauron was destroyed."

Also: World of Warcraft. It made all the cool characters from Warcraft 3 into stupid losers or killed them, and all characters who died in a meaningful way in Warcaft 3 we brought back, because they weren't really dead and got better.

Mo_the_Hawked

2012-03-29, 10:03 AM

Rocky 2-5, The first movie is fantastic and the sixith is the only other one in the series to follow it's tone.

More American Graffiti, No, just plain no.

The Godfather 3, No brainer.

Die Hard 2: Die Harder, Really the only turd in the series.

Robocop, 2 and 3, Even though I will watch them when ever they come on they still suck and feel like they should be non-canon.

Nerd-o-rama

2012-03-29, 10:30 AM

I liked Robocop 2. I liked 3 too, but it was a completely different movie from the first two.

Cespenar

2012-03-29, 10:36 AM

Someone's definitely going to say Matrix 2 and 3, so there's that.

Starscream

2012-03-29, 11:47 AM

Highlander 2+, definitely.

The 5th Friday the 13th movie, which doesn't feature Jason (neither does the first one, really, but that at least makes sense). And at the end, Tommy Jarvis goes psycho and seems ready to become a killer himself. Cut to the much better 6th movie, where he's perfectly fine and doesn't even mention the events of the 5th.

The Dark Knight Strikes Again, if we can include comic books, seems to take place in a totally different universe than Dark Knight Returns. Instead it's some bizarre political satire with completely different technology levels (takes place only a couple years later), a completely different tone, and the characters all act like they aren't even the same people. At some point, Frank Miller clearly went insane.

3rd and 4th Terminator films. The 2nd ended on such a great note, that the sequels make it less enjoyable. That's the sign of a true bad sequel, it actually wrecks the previous entries for you. That's why even though I don't think Back to the Future 3 or Ghostbusters 2 are as great as the originals, I don't mind them. They do nothing to ruin what has come before.

Not a big fan of the 4th Die Hard movie, either. The first three worked because John McClane seemed like a tough but normal guy. By the 4th film he's a frigging superhero.

Dr.Epic

2012-03-29, 11:49 AM

All I know is I'm glad there are only 3 Indiana Jones films.

razark

2012-03-29, 11:56 AM

All I know is I'm glad there are only 3 Indiana Jones films.
You mis-typed "2".

NikitaDarkstar

2012-03-29, 12:20 PM

The Highlander movies. Or let me put that right, I don't consider the Highlander movies and the Highlander TV series to be part of the same universe (no matter what End Game tries to force down my throat), the movies (first few ones) are good on their own, the tv show is good on their own, but I can't really stand the thought of both in the same universe.

The star trek movies after Return of Spock.

There's only ONE Cannonball Run movie. (In reality there's three, but no.)

The police academy movies, stop watching after the first one, if you're feeling generous watch the second one, but don't watch all six.

Rambo, again there's one movie, no more, no less.

Karoht

2012-03-29, 12:47 PM

Disney Sequels.

Pixar is exempt from this, even if we got products like Cars 2.

Maxios

2012-03-29, 12:59 PM

I have a feeling Before Watchmen will become this for some people.

Eerie

2012-03-29, 01:04 PM

Someone's definitely going to say Matrix 2 and 3, so there's that.

I don't know why some people hate Matrix 2/3 so much. It's not the original Matrix, but they are still pretty good movies.

Terminator 3, however... and Aliens 4... And why did they only filmed the third Harry Potter book? :smallamused:

Karoht

2012-03-29, 01:08 PM

I have a feeling Before Watchmen will become this for some people.I assure you sir, I have no clue what you are refering to.

Omergideon

2012-03-29, 01:10 PM

Rocky 2-5, The first movie is fantastic and the sixith is the only other one in the series to follow it's tone.

Believe it or not the 4th is the only one I really dislike. Now a lot of 5 is bad, but I do enjoy some aspects of how Rocky faced his situation in this one.

Though there is only 1 highlander film, and a PREQUEL tv series. Nothing will convince me otherwise.

Tengu_temp

2012-03-29, 01:20 PM

Nanoha Force is not a canon manga continuation of the anime. It's an official fanfic written by someone who thinks this is still the nineties and Rob Liefeld is the best thing out there.

As for Highlander sequels, all I have to say is this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr4F7Jmafj0&t=35).

Yora

2012-03-29, 02:19 PM

All I know is I'm glad there are only 3 Indiana Jones films.

Yes, but why do you post that in this thread?

vhfforever

2012-03-29, 02:31 PM

Highlander 2: The Quickening, Major League 2, and Undisputed 2 all come quickly to mind. The Underworld movies after the second one were equally bad.

Edit: How in the world could I forget about Blade Trinity. Ugh.

Goosefeather

2012-03-29, 02:47 PM

S. Darko. That is all.

Karoht

2012-03-29, 02:48 PM

I'm rather proud of how well the sarcastic posts reflect the exact degree to which people wish to remain ignorant of something's existance. It's almost... art. Sarcastic art. Love it.

Wait, they made a Harry Potter film after the first one? Are you sure?

Giggling Ghast

2012-03-29, 02:53 PM

It's a pity they never made any sequels to The Matrix, but it's probably best that they ended on a high note.

Karoht

2012-03-29, 02:57 PM

I know right? I kept seeing production shots and phoney trailers everywhere. Something with a really cool car chase and some kung fu. Oh and a girl falling out a window while firing some guns. It all looked like it was shaping up to be good. Shame really.

Kind of like all those hoax trailers for the Star Wars prequels.

Axolotl

2012-03-29, 03:01 PM

I ignore everything except the original films for Highlander, Alien, The Terminator, Planet of the Apes, 2001: A Space Odyssey.

I only acknowledge Star Trek II, III, IV and VI.

Batman Forever and Batman and Robin are unfilms.

Getting ready to say the same about Anchorman 2.

Mordar

2012-03-29, 03:03 PM

All I know is I'm glad there are only 3 Indiana Jones films.

You mis-typed "2".

Now, that's just not right. Sure, Temple of Doom wasn't Raiders or Grail, but it had plenty of good. Sure, it should have had more archeology and less "right guy in the wrong situation with a historical anthropology lesson" but it was still very good.

The star trek movies after Return of Spock.

I disagree...Undiscovered Country was good, and First Contact wasn't horrible. Strange that they only made even-numbered films though :)

- M

PS: To be on topic...in addition to the bad ST films, how about Crow 2, Karate Kid 3 and 4, and Conan the Destroyer (though if there is a way to edit Malack out, I'm good with this one)

Raimun

2012-03-29, 03:04 PM

I have to agree. There is only one Robocop and one Highlander.

Also, I'm quite certain Matrix was canceled after the "okay but not great" sequel.

I do remember that shortly after the sequel they released another sci-fi movie starring Keanu Reeves. Some people claim it's related to Matrix somehow but I don't see the connection. Matrix movies are about future hackers fighting artificial intelligence in a virtual reality world named Matrix. IIRC, that another movie was about about extremely lame mechas or something. I didn't really pay that much attention.

Telonius

2012-03-29, 03:15 PM

The Crow had some truly wretched sequels. So did Blade, and Interview with the Vampire. Queen of the Damned was one of those movies that just Should Not Be.

Jim Carrey movies are pretty bad offenders. The Mask, Dumb and Dumber, Bruce Almighty, Ace Ventura... all were movies that had at least some kind of merit or humor, that had sequels that were significantly worse than the originals.

Friday. There is only one movie in the franchise, end of story.

Karoht

2012-03-29, 03:17 PM

I didn't hate Temple of Doom or Crystal Skulls, but they remain un-films for me as well.

Any sequel of a sports film usually is going to be poor. In the case of the Air Bud films, they were doomed from the get-go. Dog playing sports. Right. I refuse to acknowledge the original, never mind the sequel.

I rather liked The Mighty Ducks. D2 wasn't aweful, but anything after that doesn't exist for me.

I personally pretend that T3 never happened, but Terminator Salvation is still in. Why? Because even as a child in 1990, I was aware that data of any kind tended to survive on more medium and in more than one location than a single building. I was also aware of a thing called the internet. For me, the Terminator series isn't over until I see Kyle Reese jump into a time portal, with a Terminator jumping in before him. I'm also curious to see how the Resistance would fight a T1000 in the future.

Telonius

2012-03-29, 03:21 PM

Oh, and no list of this sort would be complete without a mention of "Weekend at Bernie's 2."

Karoht

2012-03-29, 03:22 PM

Is it the same corpse in Weekend at Bernie's 2? Just curious.

Eerie

2012-03-29, 03:34 PM

Wait, they made a Harry Potter film after the first one? Are you sure?

What first movie? They only ever filmed the third for some reason...

Telonius

2012-03-29, 03:35 PM

Is it the same corpse in Weekend at Bernie's 2? Just curious.

Yes. Zombie-ish thing, at that point, but basically yeah.

Hiro Protagonest

2012-03-29, 03:37 PM

Catching Fire. I didn't totally ignore it, but I read the synopsis, the first few pages, and the last chapter or so, and got enough information to call it good and know that I don't want to sit through the whole thing.

Has the third book come out? I haven't read it yet.

VeliciaL

2012-03-29, 03:44 PM

As far as I'm concerned, Star Trek's 5 and Insurrection didn't happen. The other odds aren't great, but are tolerable. Those two though...

hamishspence

2012-03-29, 03:48 PM

As far as I'm concerned, Star Trek's 5 and Insurrection didn't happen.

Novelizations can (sometimes) improve my attitude to the relevant film.

Trek 5 had a pretty good novelisation.

Hiro Protagonest

2012-03-29, 03:59 PM

What first movie? They only ever filmed the third for some reason...

Hey, the first three were all pretty good. Too bad they didn't make any others.

Geddoe

2012-03-29, 04:00 PM

I actually prefer Highlander: the Series to the movie. Too bad they didn't make any other movies.

Squeejee

2012-03-29, 04:00 PM

Iskandar

2012-03-29, 05:06 PM

Actually, On Stranger Tides was actually pretty good. Not the original, of course, but still.

Edit: somewhat of a stretch, but I guess it counts. I loved the Transformers movie as a kid. I heard recently that they were going to make live action versions. Such a shame it never happened.

(ok, I'll grudgingly admit the first movie didn't totally suck. Grudgingly. Point stands on the other two.)

MCerberus

2012-03-29, 05:19 PM

razark

2012-03-29, 05:28 PM

Now, that's just not right. Sure, Temple of Doom wasn't Raiders or Grail, but it had plenty of good.
I'll just quietly point out that you didn't even bother to ask which two movies I was leaving out...

Soras Teva Gee

2012-03-29, 05:41 PM

We do people keep making up imaginary stuff in this thread?

There are so many terrible ideas here people and a few overly harsh statements on some real sequels.

Mordar

2012-03-29, 05:48 PM

Ocean's 11 (remake) was a good cheesy heist film harking back to what some would consider 'the good old days'. It's a good thing they never made any sequels, since that would have just been Clooney using a film production to bring a whole bunch of drinking buddies together and spitting out something awful.

...you mean like Frank and the boys, back in the day? :smallsmile:

I'll just quietly point out that you didn't even bother to ask which two movies I was leaving out...

Wait, you were only leaving one out...Raiders, Temple of Doom, Last Crusade are the three Indy movies. I admit that I did assume you meant Temple, 'cause the others are gold...but with this leaving two movies out (when there are only three) hoo-hah, I now wonder if maybe you got hit in the head :smallamused:

Tavar

2012-03-29, 05:50 PM

Nerd-o-rama

2012-03-29, 05:51 PM

Wait, they made a Harry Potter film after the first one? Are you sure?

There were Harry Potter films? I know there were stage musicals...

Geno9999

2012-03-29, 05:56 PM

If I post any sequels that I don't like here, it's acknowledging their existence.

Also, Spider-Man 3? What are you talking about? The series ended after 2!

The Succubus

2012-03-29, 06:00 PM

I just wanted to say that I'm glad they ended Pirates of the Caribbean after one movie. If any of those cash-ins with the Johnny Depp look-alike had been real, I might have lost respect for him as an actor, despite how much I like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

Speaking of, I seem to remember another of those books being rumored for a movie adaptation. Glad that never materialized, it really takes a special hand to make a Hunter S Thompson story work as a film.

In fairness, Fear and Loathing is strange and freakish beast of a film due to the nature of its source. The Rum Diary was a much more sedate affair in comparison and trying to shoot and style it after Fear would be a recipe for disaster. I haven't seen it myself yet though.

Generation of Swine had some interesting articles in it, my favourite being Hunter's response to a letter from Ralph Steadman on the finer points of parental discipline. :smalltongue:

McStabbington

2012-03-29, 06:17 PM

I disagree...Undiscovered Country was good, and First Contact wasn't horrible. Strange that they only made even-numbered films though :)

I'm not sure what you're talking about. "First Contact" is it?:smallconfused:

I vaguely recall there being some talk about doing a Next Generation Star Trek movie involving the Borg, but as soon as producers started requesting stuff like the Borg engaging in some kind of Dr. Evil-esque time travel plot rather than just sending 30 cubes and having a Borg Queen, Berman and Piller yanked the plug on the whole project. I'll admit it's a bit of a missed opportunity, but in retrospect, you really can't go out any better than they did in "All Good Things." And can you actually imagine a Borg Queen? I mean, who would actually be stupid enough to do that? It would completely neutralize exactly what made the Borg so damned scary in the first place.

So all in all, I have to say that I'm glad the movies ended precisely where they did. Galaxy Quest was such a great homage. . .

Reverent-One

2012-03-29, 10:42 PM

Whoa, whoa, whoa there. First Contact, being mentioned in this thread? I am disappoint.

TheFallenOne

2012-03-29, 11:40 PM

Though there is only 1 highlander film, and a PREQUEL tv series. Nothing will convince me otherwise.

*blink* never looked at it like that. Officially approved.

World of Warcraft. It made all the cool characters from Warcraft 3 into stupid losers or killed them, and all characters who died in a meaningful way in Warcaft 3 we brought back, because they weren't really dead and got better.

*meep* You placed the cut too late there. The Warcraft franchise ended after Beyond the Dark Portal, the expansion to Warcraft II. The third part was fun to play, but they messed up the story way too much.

On the topic of video games... Aquanox never happened. They totally abandoned the awesome dark atmosphere of Archimedean Dynasty(so, they have Warpdrives now? And the ocean is clean and there's living things there again? Also, strange monster from wherever?) To top it off, you HAVE to help an absolutely obvious villain, which results in the death of one of your best pals from the first game. Came close to punching the PC screen at that point.

Thanqol

2012-03-30, 12:24 AM

Metroid: Other M.[/thread]

Axolotl

2012-03-30, 02:01 AM

Whoa, whoa, whoa there. First Contact, being mentioned in this thread? I am disappoint.I think alot of us were disappointed with that film. For me it's just because of the Borg Queen, the rest of the film is all right but she ruined the Borg.

Ninjadeadbeard

2012-03-30, 02:18 AM

What first movie? They only ever filmed the third for some reason...

They skipped straight to the last book and did a two-parter. So glad they didn't have those kids acting when they were 12, huh? What a mess that could've been!

On an unrelated note, did anyone else think that they were leading up to something at the end of Xmen 2, and then just rebooted with First Class?

Feytalist

2012-03-30, 02:19 AM

All I know is that Boondock Saints 2: All Saints Day doesn't exist.

kpenguin

2012-03-30, 02:38 AM

I have to say, personally, that the practice of ignoring the existence of something that exists makes me uncomfortable.

Killer Angel

2012-03-30, 02:44 AM

Personally, the practice of mentioning the existence of something that I forgot, makes me even more uncomfortable... :smallwink:

otakuryoga

2012-03-30, 02:46 AM

any penguin after H
i'm sorry...just...no
actually there is one ok letter penguin after h...just cant quite think which one...
:smallyuk: :smallwink:

Grif

2012-03-30, 02:52 AM

Command & Conquer 4 was that one true bad sequel that never existed. Thank God it was cancelled. :smallwink:

Gettles

2012-03-30, 03:05 AM

I have to say, personally, that the practice of ignoring the existence of something that exists makes me uncomfortable.

There is a good reason to do it though. I mean how should the end of the greatest basketball player of all times career be remembered?

Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRCTp57LQro

Or like this:

http://img.fanbase.com/media.fanbase.com/8/15326/e5a67228c8056bf3e9abca16cf559fb464301ace.jpg?x=600&y=347&sig=8f05d91a17de6798d83fd277af2b83f4

Omergideon

2012-03-30, 04:05 AM

I do remember they made an awesome trailer for a fourth Indy film. Absolutely perfect it was. I wonder where the film went for it?

(In truth I do enjoy Indy 4 a fair bit, so meh to that)

And Gettles explains it perfectly. Do I really want to mar my memories of Picard with Nemesis? Do I want to recall him going out after saving all of reality under the guidance of Q and learning to truly travel to the final frontier? Or do I want to picture him fighting a bald dude supposedly related to him on a ship full of orcs in a crappy movie where JANEWAY of all people outranks him?

As for the finale of Enterprise the show (it did exist, though few episodes of the fabled first 2 seasons remain), I know they filmed a beautiful final shot with the classic speech. I just wish they had a good episode to broadcast it with.

NikitaDarkstar

2012-03-30, 08:07 AM

I actually prefer Highlander: the Series to the movie. Too bad they didn't make any other movies.

Good thing they had the common sense to refrain from making any spin-offs on it too.

thubby

2012-03-30, 08:15 AM

any sequel to any horror movie ever. most notably jaws.

Reverent-One

2012-03-30, 09:10 AM

I think alot of us were disappointed with that film. For me it's just because of the Borg Queen, the rest of the film is all right but she ruined the Borg.

I doubt it's a lot of people, we're talking about a movie that has a 92% on rotten tomatoes, with 83% approval from audience reviews (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_first_contact/) and was nominated for numerous awards. It's a generally loved movie, and while no movie appeals to everyone, it's nowhere near mostly ignored sequals like the Star Wars Prequels, matrix sequels, ect.

Sunken Valley

2012-03-30, 09:32 AM

Soras Teva Gee

2012-03-30, 09:42 AM

The Glyphstone

2012-03-30, 09:45 AM

Imagine if they had made a sequel to Masters of Orion II...

Omergideon

2012-03-30, 11:27 AM

Imagine if they had made a sequel to Masters of Orion II...

That would, with modern graphics, AI and the like, be an awesome game. Essentially do a modern remake with a bigger galaxy etc and you are sold on potentially one of the greatest 4X games ever.

I can think of no way someone could make a 3rd game that was not awesome.

*puts headphones back in*

Iskandar

2012-03-30, 04:41 PM

Hm, how about a book series? "Wizard's First Rule" by Terry Goodkind? A bit over the top in places, but a good start to a series. Shame that the author never continued it. I even heard he quit writing fantasy altogether. Sad.

(Ok, technically, you could draw the line anywhere in the first like 4 or maybe 5 books, but still, my point stands. Goodkind is one of the few authors who I just stopped reading in the middle of a book and walked away.)

kpenguin

2012-03-30, 05:00 PM

I can certainly see criticisms of First Contact having some merit but... yeah saying that it doesn't exist is ridiculous. Especially given that it's generally at about number two behind Wrath of Khan of the old series... so this of course this puts us in the uncomfortable position of Spock still being dead and a couple of great episodes of TNG never having happened.

Therein lies one of my problems with acting like a work you don't like doesn't exist. Having been on the other side, it feels like a slap in the face to us who do enjoy the work. Rather than a simple acknowledgement that tastes differ, the lack of acknowledgement that the work, and thus the other side, exists is quite maddening.

Its a bit disconcerting when you know something exists and even enjoy it and someone else is plugging up their ears and going "ah ah ah not listening"

Hazzardevil

2012-03-30, 05:27 PM

Nai_Calus

2012-03-30, 05:55 PM

I keep hearing these crazy rumors about Andrew Lloyd Webber writing a sequel musical to The Phantom of the Opera, with some cheesy title like Love Never Dies or something. I even heard a ludicrous idea about Raoul becoming a drunken gambler, the phantom owning an amusement park on Coney Island and trying to get Christine back, and Meg accidentally shooting Christine. Ridiculous nonsense. Sounds like a bad fanfic. Thank Corellon that'll never happen.

Iskandar

2012-03-30, 06:09 PM

Therein lies one of my problems with acting like a work you don't like doesn't exist. Having been on the other side, it feels like a slap in the face to us who do enjoy the work. Rather than a simple acknowledgement that tastes differ, the lack of acknowledgement that the work, and thus the other side, exists is quite maddening.

Its a bit disconcerting when you know something exists and even enjoy it and someone else is plugging up their ears and going "ah ah ah not listening"

Eh, there is a big difference, for me, between just disliking something and going so far as wishing it never existed. I dislike Titanic, for instance, while freely admitting that it was a good movie... for other people to watch. I try to disavow the existence of the Twilight movies, mostly because it is depressing to contemplate what the fact that they are so popular says about human beings in general.

Aotrs Commander

2012-03-30, 07:53 PM

I think it such a shame that Supreme Commander never got a sequel. And Dawn of War could have used some more expansions, maybe a full sequel, after Dark Crusade, but there you go...

I'm tempted to mention Sword of the Stars II, but given that's practically true (due to the state it was released in, and it's odd DX10 only release format)...

Kjata

2012-03-30, 10:38 PM

I have kind of a weird example. I like to believe that the Star Wars prequels are a completely different series. Because I do enjoy the prequels, but they cheapen the originals by turning Vader into a whiny punk who betrays everything he cared about to save his wife, which ends up killing her.

But as an incredibly bleak trilogy about a young boy who falls in love, then ends up destroying it all and allowing a tyrant to take over? Not bad.

McStabbington

2012-03-30, 11:52 PM

I doubt it's a lot of people, we're talking about a movie that has a 92% on rotten tomatoes, with 83% approval from audience reviews (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_first_contact/) and was nominated for numerous awards. It's a generally loved movie, and while no movie appeals to everyone, it's nowhere near mostly ignored sequals like the Star Wars Prequels, matrix sequels, ect.

First Contact is sort of like a reverse cult classic. Cult classic movies like Blade Runner and Donnie Darko started out with little commercial success and some very confused reviewers, but eventually they found an audience that actually loved them. First Contact, on the other hand, took the Star Trek universe by storm both with the general audience and Trekkers in particular, but the more time has passed, the more people focus on the weaknesses of the movie rather than the strengths, of which there are many.

The most obvious mistakes are the obvious storytelling flaws that were imposed on the story from above. The Borg Queen, the most (in)famous mistake, was a complete alteration of the Borg that also completely eliminated their menace. But there were plenty more examples. The script was required to have time travel in it. The rather pointed ignoring of the sensible option over the option that inspires an action scene (the Borg, in capturing the deflector dish, did not take over the shuttle bay). The fact that many of their plans make no sense (their Plan A was to get to engineering and puncture a coolant tube . . . that liquifies organic matter. Which they are made of.) And the fact that, once again, in order to save the day the heroes must disobey orders to save the day.

But the real issues with the film are actually deeper and more thematic. Put simply, this movie more than any other cemented the idea that if a Star Trek movie was to be successful, it must evoke Wrath of Khan. Now this is sad partly because there are more stories to tell in Trek than Moby ****, but also because saying that WoK = Moby **** in space sells Wrath of Khan and Trek short. WoK successfully dealt with such themes as dealing with one's age, learning to deal with a no-win scenario, the fact that sometimes heroes don't win without cost, and optimism in the face of tragedy that go far beyond Moby ****. And the actors and seven seasons of development gave them the opportunity to consider those themes and others while still keeping the necessary action beats. But the actors and the writers weren't given that chance. Because they had to follow the blueprint.

As such, I prefer to see the TNG movies as a whole as something that never happened. At best, they're something Picard imagines and remembers, distortedly, because he never actually got out of the Nexus. Through some more-logical manner than was presented in Generations, Picard got sucked in, and then the Nexus gave him exactly what would make him happy: the thought of teaming up with a legend before going off to personally smash the personification of the Borg but still keep his sense of revenge from overtaking him. It saves the franchise, and it gives me the chance to mentally rewrite Kirk's death to be bravely and brilliantly staving off the Romulans one last time.

Edit: Seriously? Moby **** is being edited by the software?

kpenguin

2012-03-31, 12:20 AM

Unfortunately, the software is indiscriminate like that. There are ways around the filter, though you should only use them to say something innocuous that would be censored, like **** Van Dyke, rather than use them for profanities.

An Enemy Spy

2012-03-31, 01:45 AM

Alien 3. I hate hate HATE this movie. This is one of the few films that actually manages to damage the movie before it. The entire end of Aliens is ruined because you know that Newt and Hicks are going to die at the beginning of the next one. Every heartwarming moment is destroyed, and any feeling of satisfaction is gone unless you just pretend that the series ends after the second movie. Why does Alien 3 even exist? Awful awful awful movie.

No brains

2012-03-31, 01:46 AM

I have to say, personally, that the practice of ignoring the existence of something that exists makes me uncomfortable.

I have to agree with you there, penguin. Although this isn't people denying the holocaust, it's just some nerds getting more creative with their whining.

As for me, Batman Begins was a twenty-thousand ton capstone for Batman. The story of how the mortal superhero conquers his human weakness and truly lives. It would be pretty easy to screw that message up though, like if he fought someone with more luck and forethought than 7 leprechauns and a fistful of prophets. And if they did it by controlling a network of the mentally ill I would just die.

An Enemy Spy

2012-03-31, 01:50 AM

I have to agree with you there, penguin. Although this isn't people denying the holocaust, it's just some nerds getting more creative with their whining.

As for me, Batman Begins was a twenty-thousand ton capstone for Batman. The story of how the mortal superhero conquers his human weakness and truly lives. It would be pretty easy to screw that message up though, like if he fought someone with more luck and forethought than 7 leprechauns and a fistful of prophets. And if they did it by controlling a network of the mentally ill I would just die.

Batman Begins isn't a sequel. I think this thread is going from "sequels I pretend don't exist because I feel they take away from the original" to "Movies I don't care for".

KillianHawkeye

2012-03-31, 09:32 AM

Soras Teva Gee

2012-03-31, 09:59 AM

I must agree with kpenguin and others who are baffled at this. The general attitude in this thread kinda sickens me.

I am perfectly capable of ignoring something while acknowledging its existence. I don't know who y'all think you're fooling, but you can't fool yourselves.

I think there's still a difference between being bad, being a crime against the original, and being both at the same time.

But yeah kinda going off the rails

KillianHawkeye

2012-03-31, 10:07 AM

I think there's still a difference between being bad, being a crime against the original, and being both at the same time.

This I can agree with.

For example, I am glad that my The Mummy "Franchise Collection Set" only contains dvds of The Mummy, The Mummy Returns, and The Scorpion King. But that doesn't mean I pretend that I didn't go see The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor in theaters twice (the second time was to make sure it really sucked because I was too stunned the first time) and decided I didn't need to own it. I remember it and I ignore it. If somebody asks me about it, I tell them that it really suffered for losing half the established cast, and for not technically being about a mummy, and that I probably wouldn't watch it again. I don't feign ignorance and sarcastically ask what they're going on about.

EDIT: I heard they also made a sequel (or maybe 2) of The Scorpion King without The Rock in it. I haven't bothered to see it/them.

Eiremauve

2012-03-31, 10:15 AM

I have to say, personally, that the practice of ignoring the existence of something that exists makes me uncomfortable.

I understand that, you shouldn't deny reality. But fictional universes aren't reality. If people don't understand when stop, we can ignore them. :smallsmile:

For me, Final Fantasy 13-2. Played a little bit. Then I saw the ending. Now, I loved FF13 and it had a perfectly good ending, why would you make a sequel wherein you accomplish nothing?

EDIT: Also, this is like establishing your own canon. Which any Star Wars fan who reads the "Expanded Universe" novels is pretty much required to do, even if it is just to assert that only the movies are canon.

Yora

2012-03-31, 10:23 AM

Now, I loved FF13 and it had a perfectly good ending, why would you make a sequel wherein you accomplish nothing?
Because Money! If money comes out, you keep milking it.

Probably no coincidence that the sin of idolatry was represented by a golden calf.

Bastian Weaver

2012-03-31, 10:48 AM

Mortal Kombat films. First movie was enjoyable. Second one? Meh.
The cartoon was nice, though.

Addams Family. First movie was good. Second movie was great. Third one? Come on. The only two actors from the original cast were Lurch the butler, and the guy playing the hand. Really.

Terminator 3 was just wrong in too many ways.

No brains

2012-03-31, 11:16 AM

Batman Begins isn't a sequel. I think this thread is going from "sequels I pretend don't exist because I feel they take away from the original" to "Movies I don't care for".

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I meant capstone in terms of pinnacle of achievement. I know it's not a sequel, and moreover I really, really like it.

Now the Dark Knight really took away from the message I took from the first film. In Begins, Batman is phobic of bats. In his quest to find the true nature of evil and how to fight it, he ends up using his fear as his persona. He then becomes the apex predator of terror, attacking extortionists with their own weapon. It's just a beautiful picture of... living. People who are not me might not take it to heart like I did, but I thought it was awesome.

In The Dark Knight, we get someone who is the opposite of Batman, but not in a logical or even enjoyable way. The Joker may as well have been all the wizards from LotR with what he's able to pull off. I could accept a ninja sect destroying cities, but wrangling the mentally ill to form an unbreakable web of contingencies does not seem probable in the least. It's this improbability that takes away from Batman being a story about powerful humans, locked by the same rules that the human audience must observe.

SmartAlec

2012-03-31, 11:37 AM

I might catch some flak for this, but: whenever I think of 'Dune', I tend to think of the book, Dune. And not the 5 books that claim to follow it. To say nothing of that 'Dune prequels' fever dream.

Aotrs Commander

2012-03-31, 12:11 PM

EDIT: Also, this is like establishing your own canon. Which any Star Wars fan who reads the "Expanded Universe" novels is pretty much required to do, even if it is just to assert that only the movies are canon.

In that specific regard, I cut off my own headcanon at the same point Zhan did, just prior to the vong invasion. (Which was utterly crushed by Thrawn's other clone (because only one clone facility with no back up? Please!) quietly off screen before things got back to regular Imperial rebel-kicking...)

SaintRidley

2012-03-31, 12:31 PM

Imagine if they had made a sequel to Masters of Orion II...

I think they did. But they scrapped the name Masters of Orion and went with Galactic Civilizations.

Turned out quite good.

kpenguin

2012-03-31, 01:51 PM

I understand that, you shouldn't deny reality. But fictional universes aren't reality. If people don't understand when stop, we can ignore them. :smallsmile:

Sure, but the actual media themselves aren't fictional, just the events, characters, etc. contained within the media are. The disc of Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull I have can attest to that. :smallsmile:

ThePhantasm

2012-03-31, 05:19 PM

Wow, this thread got a bit carried away. Let me re-explain the concept behind my original question.

First, this isn't simply about sequels that you think are bad or inferior. This isn't meant to be the nitpicky "well they never topped the original thread." This is about sequels that you refuse to consider as actually canonical because they simply screwed up what went before them. For example, the opening scenes of Alien 3 negate the entire final act of Aliens and, in my opinion, negate Ripley's triumph and the logical conclusion of her character arc. I prefer to think of it as non-canonical because, when I watch Aliens, I don't want the ending polluted by the plot of Alien 3 lingering in the back of my mind. I want to imagine something else occurred.

I used the Star Wars examples not simply because I felt they were bad movies (though in my all too fleeting critique I simply called them bland, so sorry if that caused confusion). One reason I dislike the prequels is because they make no sense in continuity. How does Anakin become a Force Ghost if only Obi-Wan and Yoda know how? Why does only Leia remember her mother? Those sorts of things. I could go on with a bit more, especially regarding how I find Anakin's characterization to be off compared to what we were led to think in the original films, but back to the point. . .

This is about sequels you chose to forget because they messed up the continuity in a major way, or were otherwise so horrible that you don't want the thought of them tainting your enjoyment of the other films.

This shouldn't be about insulting other people's opinions, or for getting insulted by their opinions. It is supposed to be a fun discussion. That's what I meant it to be, anyways.

Anyhow, I hope no one is too upset by this thread. That wasn't the intent behind it.

Omergideon

2012-03-31, 06:41 PM

I stand by my comments on Highlander in this case still. If Connor wins the prize at the end of the first movie anything set after this with immortals makes no sense at all. Highlander 2 least of all. And when begun the series was intended as a prequel to the first movie and so I choose to see it in that light.

None of the other films make any sense in the context of the first one, and so can be dismissed as alternate reality at best.

And as for MOO3, the game itself is so unlike the other 2, being a nearly unrecognisable type of game bar a few names, it cannot be considered as part of the series. It is too dissimilar.

Das Platyvark

2012-04-01, 08:32 AM

As far as the Hunger Games books go, the first was one of the best bits of YA fiction I've ever read. The second was alright, she was just still cashing in on the same idea, and the third actually seemed to cause physical pain.

Bastian Weaver

2012-04-02, 10:11 AM

Once again, Terminator 3. Because it changed the whole "there's no fate other than the one we create" theme into "more sequels, more money".

Omergideon

2012-04-02, 12:59 PM

Once again, Terminator 3. Because it changed the whole "there's no fate other than the one we create" theme into "more sequels, more money".

Though the first film provides us with a stable time loop and not any real changing of history.....

(though I may be more willing to defend T3 as I did not think T2 was that good. Good, but not that good.

Bastian Weaver

2012-04-02, 02:44 PM

Though the first film provides us with a stable time loop and not any real changing of history.....

(though I may be more willing to defend T3 as I did not think T2 was that good. Good, but not that good.

But... but...
Whatever. It's still better than the third film. Even you cannot deny that!

hamishspence

2012-04-02, 03:02 PM

For those who didn't like T3, there are a lot of alternative versions of how the machine war started.

I rather like S.M Stirling's version.

Bastian Weaver

2012-04-02, 03:15 PM

But that's what was cool about T2. The war never started.

Omergideon

2012-04-02, 05:28 PM

But... but...
Whatever. It's still better than the third film. Even you cannot deny that!

I agree, the first film is indeed much better than the third :smalltongue:

The second too.....mostly. Mostly.

Eakin

2012-04-02, 05:35 PM

Can we count spin offs in this discussion? Because as disappointing as the Star Wars prequels were they got NOTHING on the holiday special.

Also, if we can count spinoffs I have an excuse to expose you all to this. (http://kotaku.com/5898216/the-horror-and-the-glory-of-star-wars-kinects-dancing-game/gallery/1)

Kato

2012-04-02, 05:50 PM

Jim Carrey movies are pretty bad offenders. The Mask, Dumb and Dumber, Bruce Almighty, Ace Ventura...

IIRC he wasn't in half the sequels.. doesn't make them much better but he's nt to blame. If anything, he made Mask and Bruce Almighty decent movies (and I feel pretty much the same about all Ventura movies)

I also don't like to ignore things that exist... But... can I say Zelda II :smalltongue:
Or while I'm at video games, how about Lufia - Legends of Lore?

As for movies... well, there is every odd Star Trek Movie (well, most of them)... and about any Disney Sequel ever...

Gnoman

2012-04-02, 05:54 PM

Once again, Terminator 3. Because it changed the whole "there's no fate other than the one we create" theme into "more sequels, more money".

I found the fact that Terminator 3's Skynet would be destroyed by a nuclear war far more annoying.

Eakin

2012-04-02, 05:55 PM

IIRC he wasn't in half the sequels.. doesn't make them much better but he's nt to blame. If anything, he made Mask and Bruce Almighty decent movies (and I feel pretty much the same about all Ventura movies)

I also don't like to ignore things that exist... But... can I say Zelda II :smalltongue:
Or while I'm at video games, how about Lufia - Legends of Lore?

As for movies... well, there is every odd Star Trek Movie (well, most of them)... and about any Disney Sequel ever...

If you're picking a Zelda example it's hard to pick anything other than the CD-i games.

There was a Lunar game for the DS that was a major step down for the franchise too

EDIT: Final Fantasy 14 as well

lord_khaine

2012-04-02, 06:44 PM

Imagine if they had made a sequel to Masters of Orion II...

Yeah, the sudden and complete death of that serie is allmost enough to make me wanna cry :smallfrown:

Another interesting example is the sequel to Ruoni Kenshin, where even the original author apperently refused to acknowledge it, that gotta be some sort of special record :smalltongue:

Nerd-o-rama

2012-04-02, 07:20 PM

I found the fact that Terminator 3's Skynet would be destroyed by a nuclear war far more annoying.

Technically, the internet was originally designed specifically to survive nuclear bombardment (back when it was ARPAnet) - it was built for durability and redundancy. At least the major US trunks and especially the important, shielded government hardware that Skynet was primarily using would easily survive. They stay underground 24/7 after all, whereas most humans do not.

Don't get me wrong, Terminator 3 sucked ass, but this isn't one of its numerous plot holes.

Bob_the_Mighty

2012-04-02, 11:18 PM

I personally refuse to accept the Halo: Reach campaign as canon. The events of what happened on Reach had already been covered in the novels; changing the story for absolutely no reason and making it into a videogame was senseless.

Kato

2012-04-03, 06:26 AM

If you're picking a Zelda example it's hard to pick anything other than the CD-i games.

I have absolutely NO idea what you could possibly be talking about.

EDIT: Final Fantasy 14 as well

I avoided the MMO variants of the series... I'd slightly feel like mentioning Crisis Core but I guess it's more me who's annoyed by it.

Socratov

2012-04-03, 09:03 AM

while i agree with most on Indy ans star wars, i really liked matrix reloaded, shame they never atually told how the story would end. I also like how The Godfather has no sequels...

Karoht

2012-04-03, 12:11 PM

Therein lies one of my problems with acting like a work you don't like doesn't exist. Having been on the other side, it feels like a slap in the face to us who do enjoy the work. Rather than a simple acknowledgement that tastes differ, the lack of acknowledgement that the work, and thus the other side, exists is quite maddening.

Its a bit disconcerting when you know something exists and even enjoy it and someone else is plugging up their ears and going "ah ah ah not listening"
I appreciate the 'it never happened' response for it's sarcasm and tongue in cheek approach, but I fully respect that others might not.
And just like the 'ah ah ah not listening' response, it is intended to be childish, not so much clever.

Alabenson

2012-04-03, 11:07 PM

They never made a third Neverending Story movie, and any statements to the contrary are evil lies.

Also, the Hellraiser series seems to go through the odd pattern of having two good movies, followed by a fairly meh movie, followed by a movie that should not exist.

SaintRidley

2012-04-03, 11:54 PM

I, for one, am glad that nobody ever thought it would be a good idea to include multiplayer in any of the Metroid games. That would have been a disaster, I tell you what.

Ikialev

2012-04-04, 07:48 AM

Thank god the Matrix series started with Reloaded

Nerd-o-rama

2012-04-04, 08:33 AM

Thank god the Matrix series started with Reloaded

And thank god Reloaded and Revolutions weren't associated with the equally good but far more popcorn-y and completely thematically different action flick that happened to share a title and some actors with them.

Feytalist

2012-04-04, 08:56 AM

The thing about the Matrix franchise is that the Wachowskis plotted everything out right from the beginning. Everything connected to the Matrix is considered canon (such as the Animatrix and Enter the Matrix) and was meant to tie into and enhance the story right from the start. You have to view everything to have a complete picture of the narrative.

The first movie was undoubtedly different from the other two, but to ignore any of them is to ignore the overarching story, a story that I think they planned and executed quite well.

Nerd-o-rama

2012-04-04, 10:55 AM

Personally, I just thought Reloaded and Revolutions were extremely poorly executed from an entertainment and storytelling standpoint, whereas The Matrix was pretty facile from a philosophical standpoint (less arguably so than the other two, at least). My point was that both parts (the "pilot" and the "sequels") are good, but for very different reasons, because the original and the sequels just have that different of a focus, and it takes a very broad mind to enjoy all three equally or not notice the jarring shift in how the story's being told.

Karoht

2012-04-04, 11:06 AM

I personally thought that everything in Reloaded and Revolutions just felt like a series of contrived plot occurances designed to lead us into the action sequences. Sure, that happens with most action films, but here it felt particularly contrived.

Contrast that with Matrix, and at the time I thought that the fight in the subway was probably one of the most well crafted fight scenes I had ever seen, even if some of the moves were 'martial arts for martial arts sake.'

Side note, if you ever want to see some awesome fight scenes that heavily borrow from the Matrix series, I highly recommend looking up Monty Oum. Just youtube the video 'haloid' which features Samus + Master Chief duking it out. There's moves in there made famous from Matrix and Reloaded.
He also does a series called Dead Fantasy.

Gnoman

2012-04-04, 04:28 PM

Technically, the internet was originally designed specifically to survive nuclear bombardment (back when it was ARPAnet) - it was built for durability and redundancy. At least the major US trunks and especially the important, shielded government hardware that Skynet was primarily using would easily survive. They stay underground 24/7 after all, whereas most humans do not.

Don't get me wrong, Terminator 3 sucked ass, but this isn't one of its numerous plot holes.

No. Skynet was "Invulnerable" in T3 because it had distributed itself among all civilian computers to become self-aware. Even if you assume that it had the same degree of penetration into the military systems, roughly 80% of skynet would have been zapped by the EMP, not to mention the direct nuclear blasts. Skynet might survive as a lobotomized, no longer self aware remnant, but then it would be in a poor position to conduct time-travel assassination plots.

Geddoe

2012-04-04, 04:40 PM

Nerd-o-rama

2012-04-04, 06:59 PM

No. Skynet was "Invulnerable" in T3 because it had distributed itself among all civilian computers to become self-aware. Even if you assume that it had the same degree of penetration into the military systems, roughly 80% of skynet would have been zapped by the EMP, not to mention the direct nuclear blasts. Skynet might survive as a lobotomized, no longer self aware remnant, but then it would be in a poor position to conduct time-travel assassination plots.

I think you don't quite understand how a distributed system like the one described in the film works. Assuming Skynet operates like a computer worm as exposited, every system with Skynet on it contained its whole kernel operating code. Being within and networking damn near every computer on the planet (remember, it was both the virus and the counter-virus that was allowed to run free at the end to "stop" said virus) certainly gave it access to a lot more processing power, but once it hit the critical threshold of re-writing itself into sapience, every computer it had infected would have the sapient Skynet kernel as it networked and updated itself. Even if it lost a lot of those distributed resources, it was still a sapient computer program in control of the entire US military computing network.

EDIT: To put it another way, while Skynet was a single "being" for all intents and purposes, the hardware it was on was basically an army, or tools. All those civilian computers it infected were the expendable horde it used to reach its initial goal, and were no longer needed when it had full control of the US military and missile control systems.

Gnoman

2012-04-04, 07:23 PM

If it worked that way, Skynet wouldn't have needed to reach a certain level of saturation to "wake up" as in the film. It would have been self-aware long before that.

Zen Monkey

2012-04-04, 07:57 PM

I was tempted to put the Conan sequels in here, because they were silly and of a different tone than the original grim Nietzschean film. Then it occurred to me that some of the original stories were stand-alone equivalents of popcorn movies, entertaining but not always deep or connected to anything else. The character is equally prone to adventures that change history and adventures about wine, women, and wealth. I suppose there's nothing wrong with a little versatility.

Nerd-o-rama

2012-04-05, 09:01 AM

If it worked that way, Skynet wouldn't have needed to reach a certain level of saturation to "wake up" as in the film. It would have been self-aware long before that.

I was under the impression it was actually sapient from the start; it just needed admin access to the military networks to actually start doing anything useful, like controlling robot armies.

Alternatively, it required a certain amount of distributed processing power to spark its sapience and self-awareness, but once it had it there was no way to take it away because that change was written into the code (mutating, self-upgrading program, as I recall).

I mean, yes, that part's pure sci fi horse hockey, but so's the entire premise of a self-aware computer.

Talya

2012-04-05, 02:04 PM

For example, the Alien franchise to me is just the first two films: Alien and Aliens (although Prometheus looks promising). The 3rd and 4th film were just horrible. As far as I'm concerned, Ripley, Newt, and Hicks made it safely back to Earth after the events of Aliens.

Get out of my head!

With Star Wars, I generally pretend the prequels don't exist. I love the originals and I find the prequels to be comparatively... not horrible, but just bland.
See, I don't mind the story the prequels tell, I just like to pretend in my mind the movies were made with more moviemaking skill than they were.

Some franchises are easier to do this with than others. Terminator 2, for example, was meant by James Cameron to be the last Terminator film anyway. The story ends there. So it isn't hard to pretend that the 3rd and 4th film never happened.

This is true for me as well, except that there is a sequel to T2 - it was a TV series called The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Very well done, nicely executed, and poorly cancelled. :(

Do you do this with any franchises in order to free certain films from their lackluster siblings?

The Matrix is a good one to pretend it had no sequels.
Almost all Disney films with Direct-to-DVD sequels.

Gnoman

2012-04-05, 03:14 PM

I was under the impression it was actually sapient from the start; it just needed admin access to the military networks to actually start doing anything useful, like controlling robot armies.

Alternatively, it required a certain amount of distributed processing power to spark its sapience and self-awareness, but once it had it there was no way to take it away because that change was written into the code (mutating, self-upgrading program, as I recall).

I mean, yes, that part's pure sci fi horse hockey, but so's the entire premise of a self-aware computer.

I just rewatched the relevant portion of the film the other day. Skynet didn't have enough hardware to become fully self-aware until near the end of the film. It had "evolved" the doctrine of expansion and growth, but it wasn't able to make concious decisions until it reached critical mass.

Gnomish Wanderer

2012-04-07, 04:27 PM

I really liked the original concept behind The Return of the Living Dead, a more fun zombie film that was on par with titles like Evil Dead. Unfortunately the sequels continued to degenerate, changing the zombie creation catalyst in almost every other film and just degrading the humor.

And speaking of zombie films, Land of the Dead. :smallsigh: I really don't know what to say about it. Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead are some of my favorite zombie movies of all time. Day of the Dead started the breakdown by having the zombie be trainable to retain his memories. It wasn't what I was expecting from a zombie movie but it didn't technical contradict anything else stated so far. And seeing the zombie point the empty gun at his captures was powerful stuff. But Land of the Dead... It just broke the whole idea of mindless overwhelming monsters.

And then the two sequels after that were barely worth watching. How the mighty have fallen.

S. Darko. That is all.
Yes. This.

Hbgplayer

2012-04-07, 04:42 PM

Only two movies were made out of Tom Clancy's books: The Hunt for Red October and Patriot Games. If there were, hypothetically, a fourth movie, I refuse to even think about seeing it, because the probably would have changed the plot entirely.

Nerd-o-rama

2012-04-07, 05:33 PM

I just rewatched the relevant portion of the film the other day. Skynet didn't have enough hardware to become fully self-aware until near the end of the film. It had "evolved" the doctrine of expansion and growth, but it wasn't able to make concious decisions until it reached critical mass.

I still think my second explanation is the correct one. If Skynet managed to create itself on a single hardened supercomputer before the timeline was altered and easily survive the power getting pulled on that, it can make itself out of millions of computers and easily survive most of the lower-grade ones getting microwaved just as easily - bearing in mind by that point it was now root user on the good, safe, electronically-hardened government systems and had more power than it could have ever gotten from the civilian networks.

I guess I'm defending this so hard because even though the ending, the moral, and the entire concept and execution of the film itself were stupid and out of place compared to the first two, 1) I liked Hollywood writers actually stumbling over a relatively contemporary concept like the power and durability of distributed systems and 2) it was a nice callback to one of the original "computer gains sentience and annihilates humanity" stories, Arthur C. Clarke's "Dial F for Frankenstein", in which the global telecommunications network wakes up and rebels. In 1965.

Das Platyvark

2012-04-07, 10:15 PM

I won't accept any media that differs from the form the author intended it to be in (without their guidance/express permission and assistance), or that remains in the same medium, but is written by someone else (Dune springs to mind).

TheVizir

2012-04-07, 10:57 PM

Stargate Universe never happened. McKay and Woolsey are part of a team back in the Pegasus Galaxy, not reassigned to Earth agencies. O'Neil did not become a jerkass commander. Stargate did not become younger and edgier and lost all its self-aware humour in the process. NEVER HAPPENED.

Also, the final episode of Star Trek Enterprise - but considering the novel series also says it didn't happen, that's a given.

Umm... what else. Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance. Also never happened. Mass Effect 3, never happened. There was no Paranoia Fifth Edition, and all commie mutant traitors who say such should report to the nearest termination rooms for reprocessing. Etcetera, etcetera...

Talya

2012-04-08, 07:02 PM

AtlanteanTroll

2012-04-08, 07:26 PM

What is this Dragon Ball GT thing I hear people mention sometimes? Super Saiyan 4? Hell, I'm pretty sure DBZ ended after the Cell Saga.

TheVizir

2012-04-09, 12:43 AM

I was a huge StarGate fan, and SGU was the best of all of them.

Hey, to each their own ;)

I think I might have accepted it more if it didn't force Atlantis off the air, but I guess I didn't find a lot of the characters - aside from Rush and Eli - likeable. I wasn't much of a fan of Battlestar Galactica either, and SGU seemed to take a lot from that.

Besides, I loved Enterprise. Only people with no taste love Enterprise. Ergo my opinion is not valid :smallwink:

Omergideon

2012-04-09, 04:14 AM

Except one of the first things Joe says to Duncan is that Connor did the world a favor by killing The Kurgan.

And Joe did not appear until season 2. This is important as the prequel part was intended for the start of season 1. This changed, but it was the original perspective.

Wookieetank

2012-04-09, 09:54 AM

Getting ready to say the same about Anchorman 2.

Wait. What? Why? No, just no. Anchorman was fun and amsuing in its own right, and SELF CONTAINED. I don't even want to know what they're going to try for this one. :smalleek:

I have kind of a weird example. I like to believe that the Star Wars prequels are a completely different series. Because I do enjoy the prequels, but they cheapen the originals by turning Vader into a whiny punk who betrays everything he cared about to save his wife, which ends up killing her.

But as an incredibly bleak trilogy about a young boy who falls in love, then ends up destroying it all and allowing a tyrant to take over? Not bad.

If you read the book to Revenge of the Sith you find out Anakin doesn't become Vader just over trying to save his wife. Time and again he finds out that those around him are lying to him, and trying to manipulate him to their own means. When the Jedi are using you for an agenda, your wife is keeping secrets from you, and your best friend and mentor is helping the Jedi use you its understandable that you'd turn to the one person who is telling the "truth" and clueing you in to the others using you. Sadly only a small few of those scenes only made it into the movie as deleted scenes, but even those few would've added more depth to why Vader came about rather than the, "wah, I hate the universe cause I'm an angsty teenager," bit.

Feytalist

2012-04-10, 02:51 AM

Mass Effect 3, never happened.

This is the same argument as with the Matrix:

Mass Effect was always intended to be a single story. Even though it has multiple endings, it was always supposed to form a whole over all three games. So Mass Effect 3 is not a standalone game (in terms of story, at least). And even if the "best" ending in ME3 is pretty horrible, it was still intended to be so from the start. To ignore it would to leave the story hanging in the middle of the whole narrative. In effect, think of it as Mass Effect Episodes 1, 2 and 3.

And speaking of episodes, where the hell is my Half Life 2 Episode 3. Valve aren't allowed to keep us hanging on such a huge cliffhanger :/

The Glyphstone

2012-04-10, 05:42 AM

Valve: Best-paid trolls ever.

Talya

2012-04-10, 09:54 AM

This is the same argument as with the Matrix:

The Matrix (original) was made as a standalone movie. There were never plans for Reloaded or Revolutions until the massive success of the first one, and they were hackneyed tripe put together at the last second to cash in on the initial success, that subverted the message in the first one.

Mass Effect was always intended to be a single story. Even though it has multiple endings, it was always supposed to form a whole over all three games. So Mass Effect 3 is not a standalone game (in terms of story, at least). And even if the "best" ending in ME3 is pretty horrible, it was still intended to be so from the start. To ignore it would to leave the story hanging in the middle of the whole narrative. In effect, think of it as Mass Effect Episodes 1, 2 and 3.
/

Unlike the Matrix, Mass Effect was always intended to be a trilogy. However, the story outline was not complete at release, they made it up as they went along. As they completely switched story writing staff between 2 and 3, the final ending is in no way what we'd have seen if the original writers had still been in charge. In fact, the moral message provided by ME3 - that all is pointless and in the end fate is unavoidable - is the exact opposite of what the first two provided - that one person can make a difference, and that choice is everything.

Karoht

2012-04-10, 10:18 AM

ME3's ending is the way it is because they want to sell DLC as well as set up for the Mass Effect MMO. Which they were going to make, but then they won the IP for Star Wars, a much larger franchise.

Dr.Epic

2012-04-10, 06:45 PM

Anything after the first Never Ending Story.

Dire Moose

2012-04-10, 08:06 PM

The Land Before Time was my favorite movie when I was little, and I still watch it every now and then at this age.

It ended so heartwamingly that no sequels needed to be made, and so I'm glad nobody ever made one or two or seventeen of them, because they would be horrible.

Gnoman

2012-04-10, 08:19 PM

The land before time sequels were perfectly good kid's movies, and aren't terrible as "family" movies either (far less annoying than most children's works, and the animation is pretty good.) The main issue is that there was a complete genre shift after the first movie.

Dire Moose

2012-04-10, 09:44 PM

Ramza00

2012-04-10, 11:53 PM

Dragons forever died after the Dragon with the voice of Sean Connery was killed by Dennis Quaid (Bowen)

Emmerask

2012-04-11, 09:20 AM

Highlander 2,3,4 and I think there was a 5th?

Starship Troopers 2,3...

Indiana Jones 4

Matrix 3 I actually don´t mind the second, it has pretty good action

Star Wars ep1 to 3 mediocrity (which is debatable ^^) is not enough for star wars

Batman Forever, Batman & Robin...

I´m sure I´m missing a whole bunch of others :>

Imagine if they had made a sequel to Masters of Orion II...

I laughed... then I cried :smallmad:

on the same note: sots2 which is still an unplayable mess 7 months in, tried it last weekend in multiplayer with a friend again... and even if they make it work the next 3 month or so... some of the design decisions are just horribad and make me really really angry ^^

Axolotl

2012-04-11, 09:23 AM

Highlander 2,3,4 and I think there was a 5th?There was, it was a Sci-Fi channel original no less.

Emmerask

2012-04-11, 10:07 AM

There was, it was a Sci-Fi channel original no less.

:smallbiggrin:
The sad thing is I actually liked the tv series with adrian paul... but all his highlander films uhg terribad.

Anyway since I was just thinking about failed 4x games another came to mind, pax imperia 2 (pax imperia 1 was pretty much the moo2 for mac computers) then they removed everything that made that game fun... I won the game on highest difficulty by setting everything to automated...

Yora

2012-04-11, 10:20 AM

ME3's ending is the way it is because they want to sell DLC as well as set up for the Mass Effect MMO. Which they were going to make, but then they won the IP for Star Wars, a much larger franchise.
ME3 starts to suck right at the beginning. I was severely dissatisfied with it the whole time I played it. The Ending really only is the tip of the iceberg.

Thufir

2012-04-11, 08:12 PM

Hbgplayer

2012-04-12, 11:06 AM

An interesting one for me was the sixth Harry Potter film. A few months after seeing it and having massive criticisms of it, I actually forgot it had happened, and started speculating again about the casting and when it'd be released...

Something similar happend to me with that film: I completely for got that I had seen it! I knew that it came out, but I had competely forgotten that I saw the movie with a group of friends, and could not name how they did several scenes in the movie compared to the book.

Krazzman

2012-04-13, 08:02 AM

In my opinion Rambo is only complete with the sequels. I like them.
It's sad that matrix is a rip off and then made out a Chosen one plot a "I'm the machine jesus" plot.
Underworld 1 to 4 were all good in my opinion, except with rise of the lycans as the weakest of them.
But B2T:
Does it count that I hate all Transformer movies? Even the first one was bad.

John Carter destroyed my interest in any sequels if there are going to be some.
I am hoping DMC5 isn't going to destroy DMC for me...
Final Fantasy 13? (the non mmo one) destroyed my interest in the final fantasy projects.

Dr.Epic

2012-04-15, 10:55 AM

Everything after the first installment of Harry Potter. That series went downhill almost as fast as Highlander.

Talya

2012-04-16, 11:34 AM

Everything after the first installment of Harry Potter. That series went downhill almost as fast as Highlander.

Meh. The movies are nothing more than animated illustrations for the books -- including the first one.

See, I wasn't a huge fan of the books. I'm not a huge detractor of them either. They were fun, decent light adolescent entertainment. In that sense, I've always wondered what the massive fanbase is caused by, but I will say I enjoyed them.

The movies, by comparison, all of them, were incredible - at least in some respects. Great visually, great sound, great casting - they really bring the books to life, as long as you still read the books to get the plot and heart, because those things are completely absent from the movies. As such, I see them more as companions to the novels, "animated illustrations" as I said above.