Ruined by sequels?
- Thread starter suarezguy
- Start date
I can think of three prequels rather than sequels in particular...
I can't think of a single original film ruined by prequels, but I can think of prequels that made me wish at least one had been done right.
"Austin Powers", "The Matrix" and "Men in Black" spring to mind.
Then of course we have Star Wars prequels...
"Austin Powers", "The Matrix" and "Men in Black" spring to mind.
Then of course we have Star Wars prequels...
Typically if a movie has a sequel that isn't good I just won't ever watch it, which really limits whatever "harm" it could do to the original.
The only one that's a bit of a tricky gray area is the Empire Strikes Back, since it kind of doesn't have much of an ending on its own, and there's way too much of Return of the Jedi I never want to sit through again.
The only one that's a bit of a tricky gray area is the Empire Strikes Back, since it kind of doesn't have much of an ending on its own, and there's way too much of Return of the Jedi I never want to sit through again.
Go Set a Watchman by Harper Lee
Yes. I haven't re-read To Kill a Mockingbird, since Watchman came out, and I kind of don't want to.
There was some discussion before the book came out whether it was a sequel, prequel or it was an ideal that was changed and became To Kill a Mockingbird (and that's aside from the discussions over whether Harper Lee actually wanted it published).
Reiterating because this is really the only sensible response there can be.
It's the third possibility. Watchman was Lee's first draft manuscript that she presented to her editor at Lippincott; the editor then helped her shepherd the novel to its final form (Mockingbird) over a two-year period. Watchman is interesting as a literary artifact, but the way HarperCollins has promoted it has been... misleading.
The Sting II was a mediocre sequel, on the level of a Saturday afternoon made-for-TV movie, with a cast of has-beens and newcomers, and a story that undermined the scenario of the first film.
But it did not "ruin" the first one, because The Sting is a very fine standalone movie in its own right, and did not need a sequel at all.
Just like Star Wars (1977) and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan didn't need any sequels.
Kor
But it did not "ruin" the first one, because The Sting is a very fine standalone movie in its own right, and did not need a sequel at all.
Just like Star Wars (1977) and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan didn't need any sequels.
Kor
I'm perfectly comfortable using head canon to erase sequels I don't like: I don't care what Lucas or Stephen Sommers say; child Darth Vader didn't build C-3PO, and Evelyn Carnahan wasn't a born reincarnation (and spitting image) of Pharaoh Seti's daughter.
So no, I wouldn't say sequels can ruin their predecessors, though Into Darkness pretty well shredded my lingering enthusiasm for XI. By the same token, the greatness of The Dark Knight doesn't mean Batman Begins isn't a steaming pile o' crap.
So no, I wouldn't say sequels can ruin their predecessors, though Into Darkness pretty well shredded my lingering enthusiasm for XI. By the same token, the greatness of The Dark Knight doesn't mean Batman Begins isn't a steaming pile o' crap.
The follow-ups were a mixed bag. The sequel movies were pretty bad, but the spin-off TV series actually did a pretty good job of making the basic immortals concept pretty consistent and even added some good, interesting pieces to the mythos (the Watchers, Methos). Then came the final straight-to-video movie that dumped it all into the trash again...
The sequels are so far out of left field from the original I don't even relate them. The original is still quality 80s cheese.
I can think of something kind of like that. I went and saw 'Love Never Dies' with my mother when it was in Sydney, and she had never seen or read any incarnation of the Phantom of the Opera. A while later, I watched a recording of the musical POTO with her, and during the finale (where the Phantom is trying to lynch his romantic rival whilst the heroine bawls) I started going 'Look mum, he's her true love!' whilst she sat there looking shocked.
Though I wouldn't say that 'ruined' POTO for me. No more than TSFS 'ruined' TWOK for me. When I'm actually watching the predecessor, it pretty much stands alone.
Though I wouldn't say that 'ruined' POTO for me. No more than TSFS 'ruined' TWOK for me. When I'm actually watching the predecessor, it pretty much stands alone.
While I think George A. Romero went to the well with diminishing results with the latter 'Living Dead' movies, that doesn't take away my enjoyment of the first three; I simply choose not to watch them.
Similar threads
