Films That Should Never Have Had A Sequel

B

brittney.

New member
Apologies if this has already been discussed but I was loaded with the cold this weekend and just sat and watched videos and DVD's.

This led to me to question what makes someone think it was a good idea to make a sequel!

The film that made me feel this way in particular was Highlander - I know it is not to everybodys taste but the original was a great film IMO. Highlander Two & Three were shocking and blatantly contradicted the content and idea of the original!

I feel it should hav had its tagline amended to "There Should Be Only One"! :)

Any others?
 
Star Wars.

And before some fanboy tells me, it's not a sequel, it's part of a trilogy (or a shiteology now the recent films have been added), it didn't have to be as it stood alone as a great film.

Been downhill ever since.
 
Couldn't agree more. Terrible films. And I don't think they were thought of as a trilogy, I think they saw it as a cash cow.

And totally agree about Highlander. Really really really shouldn't have had a sequel.

I'd like to make a distintion between films that shouldn't have had sequels (like Highlander where the sequels totally condradicted the 1st movie), and films that had sequels you wish hadn't been made (like Speed) :)
 
The Blues Brothers :eek:

I bought the Blues Brothers and Blues Brothers 2000 in a cheap DVD box set, I have not had the courage to watch the sequel. I know it's going to spoil my memories. :cry:
 
how about police academy
karate kid
the star trek movies
a fish called wonda
the fast and the furious

most of the movies that are released now
 
Back
Top