Top Ten Good Sequels to Bad MoviesSometimes a movie comes out and it's crap. It happens (a lot). Then they announce that they want to make a sequel and everyone thinks "WHY?". Of course, typically a sequel to a much-disliked movie is also bad, but in some cases the funniest little thing happens... IT'S ACTUALLY GOOD! This list compiles the best movie sequels that followed a horrible predecessor.
While it wasn't really a stellar film, this movie was leaps and bounds better than episodes I and II. Episodes one was just dull and disappointing on the whole, and two was essentially just filler for 3 (which makes it even worse.)
Three, though, was the first prequel Star Wars movie that actually felt needed, showing the rise of the empire, anakin's transformation into Vader, and features some of the series best fight scenes. It also had a much more coherent and enjoyable story, essentially ignoring the other two movies (thank goodness).
Bottom line, Lucas really pulled himself together for the final prequel, and he did a pretty great job.
This one followed 2 pretty bad movies (although the nostalgia I get from 'Episode I' keeps me from really disliking it). The main thing that still bothers me about episodes II & III is Anakin. Hayden Christensen just annoys me. But, besides that, Episode III was far superior to the prior 2 movies and was generally considered to be on par with 'Episode VI' (although I'm not sure I like it THAT much).
Absolutely. The prequel trilogy would just have been a poor bore that fans of the original trilogy would "just get over with", if it were not for this incredible thriller.
The only prequel that truly stands among the originals. You could just ignore episodes 1 and 2, and this would be a fine place to start the movie series.
'Fast Five' wasn't the first movie in the 'Fast and the Furious' series to be good. The first movie is pretty well respected (especially in retrospect), while '2 Fast 2 Furious' can be thanked for the introduction to series regulars Roman and Tej. Then we get to 'Tokyo Drift'. There was nobody in it (except for a cameo at the end by Vin Diesel) from either of the first 2 movies, and the whole "drifting" thing means cars don't drive as fast (see a problem? ). Of course, the 4th movie brought back most of the original cast members from the 1st movie, but didn't quite perfect the whole "cars are not the main focus, just the tools used to do other stuff like perform heists and undercover busts" concept, so the movie ended up being another hot (albeit inspired) mess. So it's a good thing 'Fast Five' came along. Otherwise the series would have probably died a painful "straight-to-DVD" death.
It's a bit confusing since there are currently 7 movies in the 'X-Men' series (and 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' is sort of a stand-alone prequel movie) but 2013's 'The Wolverine', being the second Wolverine solo movie, basically acts as a sequel to the 2009 disappointment. It made more sense, didn't screw around with the continuity like the first movie did, and took place in Japan (which is awesome).
The original 'Star Trek: The Motion Picture' wasn't terrible, but it sure was dull. It had a massive budget and what was it used on? Never ending sequences of space patterns and reaction shots of the Enterprise crew members (over and over and over again). It took 20 stinking minutes just to get the ship out of space port. So the sequel didn't exactly have anywhere to go but up. It may have had a smaller budget (wonder why) but the action was more frequent and more exiting, the story was better executed, and Khan, himself, made the movie brilliant.
Even though the first Terminator was great, but sure.
I love the first Terminator and I have no idea what this is doing here, but this movie is too damn good
There was literally no point into adding another member of the Addams Family. I never liked the 1st one either. I like the animated ones better.
No, the original Addams Family wasn't terrible, but it wasn't exactly great. The sequel really raised the bar, however, and added more macabre humour and added a few interesting new characters. The scenes where Wednesday and Puglsey are at summer camp are equally funny and surreal to watch.
The first installment in the series was decent, albeit slow and pretty dialog-heavy. The sequel was a lot more of a mess. I've seen it, maybe, 4 times and I still can't remember what the plot was about. Then #3 came out in 2006 and BOOM it was awesome.J.J. Abrams' first directorial effort proved to be a smashing success and led him to become one of the biggest action movie directors on the planet. Thankfully, the series has continued on its righteous path of getting bigger and better with each new entry.
The first movie was not as much bad as it was over-kitschy. The tone of the film is miles away from every other MCU movie and, in retrospect, it has sort of become that "ah crap I have to see the 1st one before I can get to the good one" movie that everyone quietly resents. Plus, 'The Winter Soldier' kicked butt on so many levels that it made the original film look underdeveloped and uninspired. I still like 'The First Avenger' but I'd toss it in a second if I had to choose between 1 and 2.
The First Avenger most certainly wasn't bad, but Winter Soldier blew my mind. But this still shouldn't be on here
The first Captain America movie was awesome, this one was even better.
I don't like this movie. I thought it was kinda dull and it is all over the place. Jesse Eisenberg is terrible as lex Luther. The only good scene in this movie is the warehouse scene. Other than that, screw this movie.
I know the original 'Night of the Living Dead' is considered to be a classic but when you have 'Dawn of the Dead' on the screen in front of you you'll sort of forget the retroactively tame original film. If 'Night of the Living Dead' premiered tomorrow it would not be given good reviews while 'Dawn of the Dead' is still just as watchable as it was back in 1978.
A million times better than the first film.
The first one was borderline bad, I think. It wasn't nearly self-deprecating enough. It tried too hard to be a serious action film and the few giggly moments left the audience wanting more. The second movie, however, took things to a whole new (and better) level with the humour thrown in. One-liners are everywhere and the chemistry between the many memorable faces is wonderful to watch. '3' lost a bit of the magic, but let's hope '4' picks itself back up.
I was almost shocked but then I realised Return of Jafar was a thing
The thing that made this this wolverine film the wolverine we wanted was that it was rated R. The first two were PG-13 and ended up so chessy and boring.
The first two was garbage but the this one redeemed it.
Yeah, I didn't like the original that much so this is much better!
I liked neither of the first cars movies. Even thouhg this one is just decent, it ended on the highest note this franchise possibly could 've reached
Cars 1 was good but 2 kinda sucked this one redeemed the franchise
Though it didn't perform as well at the box office as the first one, this movie was a big improvement over the first one. This movie focuses more on the turtles themselves and their development, unlike the first film where they were essentially plot elements for April. It also took itself way less seriously and had more humor, making feel more like a ninja turtles movie than the cookie-cutter blockbuster that was the first film. It actually FEELS like a ninja turtles movie.
Overall, this is what the first movie should have been, and is recommended; funny, action packed, and super fun as a result.
The first movie was crap I didn't like it it was over cliche and it had a boring plot which was a cliche. But the second movie was good it had a great plot and funny