Least favorite animated sequels

bezeertwin2

New member
In your opinion, what are some of your least favorite animated sequels and explain why instead of just making a list! Animated sequels are famous for being lousy, second-rate movies that are simply ways for the companies to make money. I have a few of my own.

The Little Mermaid 2: What were they thinking when they made this movie!? The animation is off, Morgana is a lame villain and Tip and Dash are your typical pointless comedic duo characters(Although it did work in the Lion King). It doesn't feel like the Little Mermaid at all.

Aladdin and the return of Jafar: *Sigh* lame! It was okay I guess, but it looked and felt like something that belonged to the animated series. And that Abis-mal guy is lame!

An American Tale 2 Fivel goes west: It's a silly, western comedy with tons of sight gags and bright, bright animation. Certainly not up to par with Don Bluth's classic: An American Tale.

The Jungle Book 2: And the point of this movie is......?:shrug:
 
Aladdin 3: The only highlight was Robin Williams as the return of Genie, but even then, about 80% of the jokes he said was a fourth wall joke or other Disney movie reference (CODE RED was pretty funny, though)). It felt like watching a really long Saturday morning cartoon.

The idea of Jasmine and Aladdin finally getting married confused me though.

Jasmine was suppose to get married in "three days" according to the first movie. Yet, the series and second movie also play a part in the series, so either those were the longest 3 days ever or she was suppose to choose a suitor in three days, not actually get married.
 
Shrek the Third: the whole thing just screamed "We're only in it for the money now!". Especially when you consider that the original Shrek didn't warrant a sequel, nor was it originally intended to have any follow-ups.

The Secret of NIMH 2: Timmy to the Rescue: Here's an idea: let's take The Secret of NIMH, one of the finest animated features of our era, take out all of the drama, intensity deep, layered story structure and genuine heart that the first movie had and turn it into an artistically bankrupt made-for-video cheapquel. Aces. :sweat:
 
Oh, yeah, "Shrek the Third". It was such a mess that nearly all of the creative staff left, with only one or two originals stuck on the project, who then in turn got stuck with the hacks that produce Dreamworks other animated films. Admittedly, it isn't a total failure. The two dream sequences (Shrek's nightmare and Gingy's six-million-dolllar man one) are quite funny and worth of the first two, but I kid you not when I say they are the ONLY good things about it. And three to four minutes of film does not make up for the other 88 minutes. I hope better for the fourth. And I fully expect Baltofan to come in here quoting me and saying "Shut your face! You're wrong!", never to return to explain himself.

I'm also not looking forward to "Cars 2". Seeing as how Doc Hollywood never had a sequel, I wonder what plot Lasseter is going rip off this time. Of course, it'll come to him on a soul-searching road trip...to the video store...
 
Cinderella II: Dreams Come True.

I saw it once.

It's three separate stories, the morals of which I could see coming a mile away.

The songs are utterly forgettable.

It clearly was not made for any other purpose than to capitalize on its classic predecessor.
 
I actually kind of liked The Return of Jafar, but not as a movie. I think that sequel would have worked a lot better if it was just labeled as the premier for the series, instead of a direct sequel to the first film. I also thought that Aladdin 3 was much better since it tied up the story nicely, Robbin Williams returns as Genie and I personally liked how Aladdin became closer to his father by the end.

Anyway, I don't find that too many Disney DVD sequels are that bad, except the ones on my list.

Mulan 2: I loved the story in the first film with a daughter trying to protect her father, as well as trying to find herself, but this sequel was a waste of time. Most of the songs felt like weak copies from the original songs and the love angel that they were playing felt really weak as well, especially with the three soliders who just happend to fall in love with three princesses who were to be given away for marriage to protect China from war. While it does have its moments with Mulan and Chang, especially that bridge scene, it overall doesn't feel like even a decent sequel to the movie.

Pochantas 2: Okay, despite all of the historical inaccuries in the first film, like Disney would actually animate the actual story for children, I did enjoy the first film. I really liked the songs, the animation and I actually did cry a bit at the end. However, this sequel also feels like a waste of time. Almost all of the songs are forgettable, outside of "Where Do I Go From Here?," and the return of the villain from the first film felt kind of weak. While I do like how Disney did have John Rolf and Pochantas ending up together like they really did, or close to it, and for telling the viewers in the credits to look up the real Pochantas, I felt like the story was weak and almost rushed.

Brother Bear 2: I love the first movie more than both of the original movies listed above. The music was great and I thought that the story was beautiful. The sequel, on the other hand, really felt unnecessary. It was another love story and while it was cute at times, I just felt like the first movie didn't need a sequel. At all. The original story fulfilled its purpose with Keenai chosing to live with Koda and the other bears and imbracing love to become a man in his village. The idea of Keenai finding a wife just felt so unneccssary. Plus, they didn't even have Phil Collins for the music, which would have at least made the movie a bit better.

Balto 3:Wings of Change: I love the first Balto film so much for its story and music. I thought that Wolf Quest was one of the better animated sequels out there. But the third film just lacks the story element that both first films had. There's more focus on the love life for Boris and on his son than on Balto, unlike in Wolf Quest which had a pretty good balance for both Balto and his daughter. It still has some enjoyable qualities in the film, but it probably would have been better if the story was just written better or if there was better development for the characters.

All Dogs Go To Heaven 2: I'll admit that this film also has enjoyable qualities, but it just doesn't compare to the first film. The original movie had a better and darker story line with better connection between the characters. It's also kind of weird that the first movie takes place in New Orleans in the 1930s, while the sequel takes place in Sand Fransicso during the 1990s. It feels like this movie just didn't have to be made considering how well the first one was and its ending.
 
Well, I disagree with you if by LK2 you mean "Lion King 2". Mostly because of the idea of having a lioness be the next "king". That was so stupidly politically correct it made me gag. Feh. That would never happen in the wild, and yes I know "The Lion King" was a total fantasy, but it had its roots in the way the animals in the Serengeti actually behave. Lions and hyenas are deadly enemies, lions kill herbivores primarily because they're hungry but otherwise leave them be, and male lions do try to "dethrone" each other and will try to kill the offspring of the deposed monarch. That's the element that gives The Lion King resonance, and to turn the actual lion rite of ascension on its ear just to be "fair" is both condescending and stupid IMO.
 
When did the movie say Kiara was going to be the next king?

I don't remember anything like that at all.

I actually liked Lion King 2 because it expanded upon the concepts in the original movie without ripping it off.

Unlike...



No kidding. What original message is the movie trying to get across? That we become our parents? The idea of Ariel becoming a concerned mother was all right, but the extreme lengths they went to were kinda ridiculous. (Did they really need to threaten the kids life?)

I find that the trap most disney sequels fall into is that they rely far too much on nostalgia ('with all your old friends!')...
 
Well, remember the ending of the Lion King? Simba and Nala's new cub was presented to the rest of the animal kingdom, just like Simba was in the film's beginning. That cub was Kiara, and that's how the sequel began, if I remember rightly - with Kiara being presented as the future ruler.
 
Kiara was being presented as the future ruler, but not as a king. I clearly remember that during the movie that Simba told Kiara that she will become queen, not king, to take his place. While I understand that The Lion King doesn't accurately describe the actual life style of lions or how their pride system works, I honestly don't think that Disney could make an animated film that could do that and appeal to young children at the same time. Most kids would be too scared to see animated lions eat the cubs of former rulers. I honestly would be too.

I also thought that The Lion King 2 was one of the better Disney DVD sequels, if not the best one, because it gave a great conclusion for the story that was established in the first film. Simba taught his daughter what she needed to know to become a ruler, he was able to let go of the pain of how he couldn't save his father and Kiara and Kovu were able to help end the fight between the two prides with their love. I also thought that most of their songs were pretty good too.
 
Bravo. You have just concisely summed up why I utterly despite SoN2. That movie wasn't worth paying Dom DeLuise and Arthur Malet to reprise their characters' voices.

-Kim
 
I agree with all of the movies you guys have listed so far. I thought some of the early 'Land Before Time' sequels were OK but after a while things just started to get embarrassing.:shrug: Secret of NIMH 2 was just awful...it pains me to see an awsome movie be given such a crappy sequel (the same can be said about all the Disney sequels)
 
Back
Top