Most ruined franchises by sequels (or prequels!)

Kermit.de.frog

Just wondering away from the Terminator 6 thread.

What are the other most ruined franchises for fans by the movies that followed the original great films in your opinion? (and I don't mean from a money making perspective - people will go and watch anything bad with a brand unfortunately).

And come to think of it has any classic movie franchise every been redeemed by what followed the first movie or two?

I genuinely can't think of one...

Three off the top of my head

Alien - ruined
Indiana Jones - fcuking destroyed by the last one "Indiana Jones and the Aliens":D
Star Trek - failed to be reignited for fans despite a half decent effort.

etc

If I had to pick one I think maybe Batman might have been temporarily redeemed by Christopher Nolan.

Then came "Batman vs Superman" and, well, back in the graveyard again.:pac:

One day in the future we will get something new, original and great. :cool:

Moghead

The sequels to the Matrix were very disappointing.

CatFromHue

I think Terminator Gensis is way out on it's on for franchise ruining as it ruined the past, the present, and the future as well as being a boring and bad and stupid film.

The only way to continue that franchise is to completely ignore it.

It was far worse than Prometheus or Covenent in the Alien films.

hgfj

Godfather 3

First two movies were genius then came number 3. Very disappointing.

Electric Nitwit

Moghead wrote: »

The sequels to the Matrix were very disappointing.

Definitive answer

Kermit.de.frog

hgfj wrote: »

Godfather 3

First two movies were genius then came number 3. Very disappointing.

Couldn't agree more.

The mind boggles how they went from gf2 to that.

Best not to think about it. Al Pacino hated it as well but just did it for a payday.

Part 3 was an offensive piece of work really.

Rothko

hgfj wrote: »

Godfather 3

First two movies were genius then came number 3. Very disappointing.

I never thought that Part 3 was that bad, apart from Sofia Coppola's acting.

I'd give it about a 6 out of 10. Obviously, it was always going to be disappointing after the first two films. It'd be impossible to live up to them.

boardie100

Ghostbusters...zoolander, dumb and dumber

MaceFace

boardie100 wrote: »

Ghostbusters...zoolander, dumb and dumber

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome

Wedwood

Empire Strikes Back -

Irvin Kershner completely derailed the plot points established in Star Wars. Luke goes from hero of the first movie to hiding away on some backwater planet from his friends in need of help, which is a complete change in character.

Han and Leia abandon the Rebellion and travel to some casino-like floating city on an utterly pointless mission which achieves nothing.

The main baddie turns out to be some Emperor fella, says a few words and then not seen again for the rest of the movie. Might as well have got Vader to kill him there and then.

Then to cap it all, they turn that Vader guy into Luke's dad, making a complete mockery of the storyline of the first movie, making Alec Guinness either a fool or a liar.

The next movie will have some job to 'course correct' this mess.

CinemaGuy45

Wedwood wrote: »

Empire Strikes Back -

Irvin Kershner completely derailed the plot points established in Star Wars. Luke goes from hero of the first movie to hiding away on some backwater planet from his friends in need of help, which is a complete change in character.

Han and Leia abandon the Rebellion and travel to some casino-like floating city on an utterly pointless mission which achieves nothing.

The main baddie turns out to be some Emperor fella, says a few words and then not seen again for the rest of the movie. Might as well have got Vader to kill him there and then.

Then to cap it all, they turn that Vader guy into Luke's dad, making a complete mockery of the storyline of the first movie, making Alec Guinness either a fool or a liar.

The next movie will have some job to 'course correct' this mess.

Some people will post any nonsense to defend the diarrhoea Disney has poured over this once great franchise.

AMKC

I agree that the JJ Star Trek films damaged the franchise. In fact I think they did more harm that good as they were just made to get a quick buck did not have any deep meaningful storyline to them or any of the values we associate with Star Trek. Instead they were just any action film with explosions.
Transformers has been ruined as well. I am not really sure if there was any films before the Micheal Bay ones but most of them ones are just terrible to watch.
There is hope do as the new Bumblebee movie was excellent.

Sirsok

Well in terms of Horror / Gore classics....

The Devils Rejects, totally redeems that nonsense at the end of House of a Tbousand Corpses.

On the other side

Mortal Kombat sequel was the biggest disappointing movie sequel I have ever witnessed and ruin the first one for me!

Optimalprimerib

MaceFace wrote: »

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome

Actually mad Max fury road is a good call for rejuvenating a franchise. That was excellent.

CosmicFool

Jurassic park sequels ruined it. Although Jurrasic World was decent but the sequel to that was awful again.

pixelburp

MaceFace wrote: »

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome

Fun fact: Thunderdome wasn't originally a Mad Max film: I forget the finer detail, but it was originally an unrelated 'Lord of the Flies in the Apocalypse' story, aimed as a kids movie too, but late enough in gestation George Miller re-worked the script to include Max.

I think it's an unfairly maligned film; has its charms, but if the film killed the franchise, Fury Road gave it a fuel-injected, chrome polished kick in the pants.

Dades

Of the franchises I've seen mentioned here, Die Hard is the most definitive.

The series could arguably be directly ranked 1-5 in terms of quality, with Die Hard being the best, and Die Hard 5 being the worst.

I don't believe a lessor sequel ruins a franchise. The original can't be ruined by another movie. But there comes a point when it becomes a cynical exercise. I love the first Resident Evil movie, but the sequels are all inferior. Still watch 'em though.

con___manx1

the predator squeals are all rubbish. the original film with arnie is one of my favorites.

callaway92

CosmicFool wrote: »

Jurassic park sequels ruined it. Although Jurrasic World was decent but the sequel to that was awful again.

I thought The Lost World was a great movie, picking up where the first one finished.

DaeryssaOne

I remember really enjoying Ocean's 11 when it was first out (the Clooney / Pitt / Damon version) but the sequels were purely money-making machines and let's not go near the Ocean's 8 female version. I'm all for movies with all female leads etc. but god do something original instead of asking for derision by remaking a good movie

B_ecke_r

ah lads, can't believe no one has mentioned Jaws 3D and the 4th one with the roaring shark

agree with most the others although I personally liked Star Wars 1, 2 and 3

they may not be of the quality of their predecessor but an enjoyable watch imo

Robocop is up there too - first one is a masterpiece - others.... nah

CastorTroy

I just found out there's a Backdraft 2.
But ignoring crappy DTV sequels/prequels like the Bloodsport franchise and just going with the movies with the original cast returning, I would agree with Die Hard.
Universal Soldier as well. After 2 "sequels" with a new cast, Van Damme and Lundgren returned to do sequels.
As a fan of the original Final Destination, I felt 2 was a disappointment.
Although I haven't seen past 4, the Hellraiser franchise went downhill, supposedly.

Lethal Weapon 4. Pure Utter Shyte Drivel, on Lethal Weapon 3, Lethal Weapon 2 and Lethal Weapon.

In Lethal Weapon 4, his pregnant partner gets kidnapped, escapes, very easily oh and she's pregnant... rubbish

budgemook

X-Men.

First was okay, second was good but then the series was utterly destroyed by number three. What happened next was a bit series rescuing genius - it was as if they were rebooting it but they blended the prequels with the original movies and wiped number 3 from the series altogether - all with a clever bit of time travel. Days of Future Past completely rescued the X Men series.

A lot of people said Apocolypse was crap but I enjoyed it.

Destroyed:

RoboCop. 1 and 2 are amazing gems, the rest are abominable, but thankfully not seen by enough to destroy the originals


Redeemed:

The Evil Dead
The first one is ok, but Evil Dead 2 (pretty much a remake of the first) and Evil Dead 3 are still great fun.

BrianBoru00

Police Academy 28 is where it jumped the shark for me

Hal3000

Jaws 3 was atrocious. Predator 2 was also beyond brutal.

RobbingBandit

Terminator should have stopped at Judgement Day

AMKC

budgemook wrote: »

X-Men.

First was okay, second was good but then the series was utterly destroyed by number three. What happened next was a bit series rescuing genius - it was as if they were rebooting it but they blended the prequels with the original movies and wiped number 3 from the series altogether - all with a clever bit of time travel. Days of Future Past completely rescued the X Men series.

A lot of people said Apocolypse was crap but I enjoyed it.

I might be in the minority here but I like X-Men 3.

Have to agree do that ''Days of Future Past'' is the best one.

OU812

Dades wrote: »

Of the franchises I've seen mentioned here, Die Hard is the most definitive.

The series could arguably be directly ranked 1-5 in terms of quality, with Die Hard being the best, and Die Hard 5 being the worst.

1 Die Hard
2 Die Hard: With a vengeance
3 Die Hard: Die Harder
4 Die Hard: 16 Blocks (the almost unknown sequel where John McClane goes deep undercover as Detective Jack Mosley in another precinct to get a witness (Mos Def) 16 blocks to testify against corrupt cops in the force)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqffzRFzdco

That's all they made. There are no other Die Hard movies

Kolido

Would agree with most opinions here. For franchises that have better sequels, I think some of the Fast and furious sequels have been better than the original, especailly in terms of all out action.
The Bond franchise also has gone up and down at certain times. The 2nd movie, from Russia with love probably being the best one imo.
The Dirty Harry series I would rate 1-5 in the order they were released, the first being the best obviously.

RayCun

It's a good thing nobody ever made any sequels to Highlander.

Ipso

B_ecke_r wrote: »

ah lads, can't believe no one has mentioned Jaws 3D and the 4th one with the roaring shark

agree with most the others although I personally liked Star Wars 1, 2 and 3

they may not be of the quality of their predecessor but an enjoyable watch imo

Robocop is up there too - first one is a masterpiece - others.... nah

“I have never seen it (Jaws 4) but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built and it is terrific.“
Michael Caine

CrankyHaus

Horror franchises are in a different league entirely for awful sequels. Just two examples:

Halloween VIIII, funded by Yamaha, with Van Damme and Michael Myers in a jetski race.




Leprechaun in the Hood. Warwick Davis rapping in an Oirish accent about Dublin and the Cliffs of Moher.

Ipso

RayCun wrote: »

It's a good thing nobody ever made any sequels to Highlander.

Or Police Academy.

Ted 2.

We get to find out Ted's surname. Some fan tournament. Flash Gordon still does come.

El Duda

The Saw sequels are so bad that people have actually forgotten that the first one is good.

Hector Savage

I agree Indiana Jones 4 and Terminator Genisys are absolute dung heaps of films, but to say they ruin the franchise ?
Nah, the original IJ trilogy are still great films (particularly 1,3) 4 doesn't effect those films for me.

Same with Terminator, my take on Terminator franchise is T1,T2 ... that's it, that's where the story ends.

loyatemu

there's a difference between a film being a bad sequel (like Godfather III) and retrospectively ruining aspects of the original films. Highlander 2 is an example of the latter - it made a nonsense of the first film by revealing they were all aliens.

Kolido

Kolido wrote: »

Would agree with most opinions here. For franchises that have better sequels, I think some of the Fast and furious sequels have been better than the original, especailly in terms of all out action.
The Bond franchise also has gone up and down at certain times. The 2nd movie, from Russia with love probably being the best one imo.
The Dirty Harry series I would rate 1-5 in the order they were released, the first being the best obviously.

The last good Bond film was Goldeneye.

Kolido

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The last good Bond film was Goldeneye.

Casino Royale was very good I thought and Skyfall was decent.

loyatemu

loyatemu wrote: »

there's a difference between a film being a bad sequel (like Godfather III) and retrospectively ruining aspects of the original films. Highlander 2 is an example of the latter - it made a nonsense of the first film by revealing they were all aliens.

I got to agree here, or films which as a direct carry on from a previous film.
Matrix 2 was ok but a complete set up for 3 and that was sh1t, so ruins 2 also.

Which is why I hate non self-contained films, sure set up a sequel but close off your film as if another film is not assured

AMKC

The Mission impossible films have been up and down.

pixelburp

AMKC wrote: »

The Mission impossible films have been up and down.

I dunno, think only the John Woo film was the series' most demonstrable dip; Rogue Nation was so-so, but the rest are top drawer IMO

Dades

pixelburp wrote: »

I dunno, think only the John Woo film was the series' most demonstrable dip; Rogue Nation was so-so, but the rest are top drawer IMO

I agree. The only real dip was II. In fact Fallout is right up there with M:I.

Mantis Toboggan

El Duda wrote: »

The Saw sequels are so bad that people have actually forgotten that the first one is good.

Yes SAW 1 was an excellent movie but what followed right up until saw 6 and Jigsaw were muck.

Ravn

Hannibal rising was really poor and seems to have killed the film franchise. although it was really dropping off ever since the silence of the lambs.

TerrorFirmer

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Yes SAW 1 was an excellent movie but what followed right up until saw 6 and Jigsaw were muck.

Saw 2 and 3 are OK...ish. Saw 4 and 5 are terrible, 6 I thought was an improvement, Saw 3D was not as bad as 4 or 5...but then Jigsaw was absolute dung.

Standout disimprovements would be Terminator, Matrix, Star Wars prequels, Resident Evil, Alien (post Aliens), Transformers (except Bumblebee).

Some are major disimprovements but remain watchable (Matrix, Star Wars, Alien) others have turned into absolute stinkers (Resident Evil, Transformers).

Robocop is up there too - first one is a masterpiece - others.... nah

Robocop 2 is a great piece of OTT violent action cinema to be fair at least, and Robocop, the 2014 one, is surprisingly competent.

Robocop 3 was the one that should be scrubbed from history, along with some of those god awful TV movies.

Someone mentioned the Leprechaun movies.....Leprechaun 4: In Space is actually a masterpiece in bad filmmaking. It's 'The Room' levels of entertaining, and honestly is one of my favourite movies ever.

dresden8

OU812 wrote: »

1 Die Hard
2 Die Hard: With a vengeance
3 Die Hard: Die Harder
4 Die Hard: 16 Blocks (the almost unknown sequel where John McClane goes deep undercover as Detective Jack Mosley in another precinct to get a witness (Mos Def) 16 blocks to testify against corrupt cops in the force)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqffzRFzdco

That's all they made. There are no other Die Hard movies

The Fifth Element is one of the better Die Hard movies.

ballyargus

The good, the bad and the ugly surpassed both predecessors in the trilogy in terms of quality. Most franchises, as this thread has shown, a swift slide to sh*te

Rothko

Kolido wrote: »

Casino Royale was very good I thought and Skyfall was decent.

I think Casino Royale is the best installment in the whole series.