This is not to discuss all sequels of bad movies. There are some movies, that did incredibly well, either in theater or in DVD sales, like Big Mommas House, or Friday, or Scary Movie. Those movies did well enough that the money drove the sequel. Nor is it to talk about sequles that were bad, plenty of stuff therre already. I want to talk about movies that didn’t deserve a sequel and yet got one.
I was in the video store and saw this: D&D 2: Wrath of the Dragon God
I saw the first one in the theater and wow, did it suck. Ok, that may be my opinion, but I’m its core audience (well I may be older than the core audience), and I wanted it to be good. There were some good moments, but they were few and far between. So what genius decided that movie warranted a sequel? Did the first one do well in DVD sales? I can’t imagine it did, but maybe. I do know that I’ll be renting it someday soon. Doubt I’ll buy it though.
Also I saw this movie: The Net 2.0 And again, the first one was decent enough, but without Bullock, it shouldn’t have been made. I think it’d be hilarious if there was an argument over money, and Bullock said, “I want $X or I won’t do the movie”, and the producer retorted, “Fine, we don’t need you, this movie can carry itself without you!” and in my head there’s a quick cut to that guy managing a dive bar in West Hollywood.
So I now put it to you Dopers, what other movies are actually sequels to movies that were either horrible or did horribly.
Yeah, that qualifies. i wonder if there should be a new category called, “needed a loss for my taxes”. I mean how does Rob Schneider not get laughed out of whatever office he’s pitching it in?
Actually, every time I am notified of a new reincarnation of Scary movie I am stunned. I can see that they are popular, but the series has been outright awful from the very beginning and, as I understand it, gets worse by each installation.
I walked out of Speed 2: Cruise Control. Which begs the question: “Why did you go to Speed 2: Cruise Control in the first place?” And for that, I have no answer. My excuse: I was 16.
Suffice it to say, that movie really, really, really, really (ad infinitum) sucked
If it makes anything clearer, the sequel was a Sci-Fi Channel original movie. I didn’t watch it, but from what I understand, it has nothing to do with the plot of the original.
I was stunned to find out that there were at least two sequels to “From Dusk Til Dawn” which I’ve never seen.
The first had some interesting moments, but was nothing to write home about. I can’t imagine what excuse they could have for the sequels and what horrible affairs they must be.
It’s a sequel in the slightest sense of the word. Damodar serves as the cackling bad guy, but his backstory in the previous movie doesn’t matter much at all after his initial introduction. It actually wasn’t that terrible. I’ve managed to block the first one out of my mind. The second was… watchable. perhaps even a bit enjoyable. Much less silly, for the most part. They at least tried to take things a tiny bit seriously.
House of the Dead 2. On what concievable level was that neccesary? Also, Hollow Man 2. I like the first :eek: but surely one was ample. I also believe that at this stage, there are more Wishmaster sequels than Nightmare on Elm street movies. Wild Things 2,3. American Psycho 2. Cruel Intentions 2,3.
Just as long as there is a name people can recognise, they’ll sequel it.
Stallone is now almost 60 years old. I assumed this film would involve his mentoring a younger boxer, some plucky kid from the streets of Philly who reminds Rocky of himself at his age, etc. No such luck:
“Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone) has now been retired for some time, but hard-up for money, he decides to step back into the ring against a few small-time boxers. Everything changes, though, when Rocky is offered the opportunity to step in with the reigning Heavyweight Champion, Mason “The Line” Dixon. Does Rocky still have what it takes to make another Championship comeback??”
