Does a bad sequel or prequel harm the original?

Discussion in 'Entertainment and Movie Talk' started by rodneyfaile, May 6, 2012.

  1. rodneyfaile

    rodneyfaile Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,980
    In the past I have always been in favor of any and all sequels/prequels getting made. My thought was always, if it sucks I can just ignore it. Caddyshack 2 doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the original Caddyshack in the least.

    Then I got to thinking about Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I asked myself, does the fact that Spock comes back somehow diminish the impact of his sacrifice? I must admit it does.

    Fast-forward to The Avengers. I enjoyed it so much, I immediately began to compare it to other movies I consider as my favorites of all time. I was ready to welcome a new one into the fold. But something was missing, but what? My list seemed odd.

    Star Wars!

    Why was it no longer anywhere in my list?!

    I remember a time when almost anyone you talked to would obviously have Star Wars as their favorite movie. Whenever the question of favorite or best movie would be asked, it was as if Star Wars was a given, and any list was just whatever came after that.

    I don't know too many people that still feel that way. What happened? Did the prequels and George Lucas edits somehow diminish the originals?

    I didn't think it possible, but it would seem that is exactly what happened.

    I used to think maybe I just got older, and the same kind of film making no longer appeals to me like it did. Movies like The Avengers and Harry Potter prove that even though I am older, I can still appreciate what some consider a kids movie, if it is a good movie. I think I just have to say George Lucas just made some really bad movies that has damaged his original work.

    Maybe I don't want to see Ghostbusters 3 after all. A reboot would be easier to ignore. That is kinda what Caddyshack 2 was anyway.
     
  2. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    They are just movies.

    Quit over thinking it all.
     
  3. dbuck

    dbuck Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,011
    Alien 3 absolutely destroys Aliens. I have to pretend it doesn't exist. I imagine a better future for Hicks and Newt than the crap that was 3.

    Superman three and four. Gads.

    There are a lot more, but I will stop. I named the ones that bother me the most.
     
  4. rodneyfaile

    rodneyfaile Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,980
    I can't maintain that level of cognitive dissonance. When I watch Wrath of Khan, I know Spock isn't really making the ultimate sacrifice. When I see the beginning of A New Hope, I am just not as impressed with Darth Vader as I used to be after hearing "Nooooo!"
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2012
  5. rodneyfaile

    rodneyfaile Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,980
    I'm still in favor of sequels/prequels and reboots. Some of the best movies out there are sequels and reboots like the Maltese Falcon and Terminator 2.
    I just have to acknowledge they can have more impact on the originals than I previously gave them credit for. Caution! Tread lightly!
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2012
  6. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    It's easier when senility starts to set in.
     
  7. JoeG

    JoeG Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,566
    The crappy prequels and endless revisions to the Star Wars films has not affected my love for the originals in the slightest. In fact it makes me appreciate them even more. Same goes for other film series. I can focus on what I like and ignore the rest.
     
  8. Zombie_61

    Zombie_61 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,080
    For me, the answer is no. Jaws is one of my all time favorite movies; the fact that Jaws 2, 3, and 4 were rubbish doesn't diminish that. The Star Wars Prequel Trilogy was disappointing, but it didn't affect my love of the Original Trilogy. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom was a horrid prequel, but I still love Raiders of the Lost Ark. And so on; I'm sure you understand the point I'm trying to make here.

    With regards to...
    ...obviously I don't feel that way. The Not-So-Special-Editions of the Original Trilogy movies, on the other hand, are an entirely different matter. Lucas' tinkering, particularly with Star Wars (Episode IV, A New Hope, whatever you want to call it) has indeed damaged his original work. His added and re-edited scenes have ruined the pacing of the original versions of the Original Trilogy movies and, for me, made them far less enjoyable to watch.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2012
  9. Probe Droid

    Probe Droid Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,790
    No. A good film stands individually. If the sequels are good (Aliens), fine, if not (The Sting II), ignore them.
     
  10. JBReplicas

    JBReplicas Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,785
    I don't think so, Alien was great, Aliens was fantastic, Alien 3 was pretty poor but it doesn't take anything away from the first 2, just like the Prequels don't ruin the Original Star Wars trilogy, if you choose you can simply not watch them.
     
  11. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355
    I'll vote 'yes'. When I used to think about Indy - the trilogy of films - there was always an almost magical power that those films had. It was an unnassailable kingdom of perfect entertainment, perfect character. Once KotCS hit (and I'm not a hater by any stretch, I think there was stuff to like about that movie) and was substantially...less than the three which preceeded it, and I thought about the Indy movies, they were no longer flawless and awe-inspiring as a whole, and I don't get that same giddy response as we fade in on the Paramount logo. I still enjoy the movies, but something has been lost.
     
  12. OldKen

    OldKen Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,850
    In short?

    It can.

    Depends on who you are!
     
  13. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Star Trek V does not make me dislike Star Trek II.

    Insurrection does not make me hate First Contact.

    Star Trek '09 does not make me never want to watch Star Trek again.

    Similarly AvP and AvPR does not make me never want to watch Alien or Predator again. Sure I can get up in arms that both franchises were thrown in the toilet by those two films, however that certainly does not make me want to throw away my copy of the first 3 Alien films (yes I said "3". I like Alien3). Nor does it make me dislike the Predator films (that franchise redeemed itself slightly with "Predators"; perhaps "Prometheus" will put the Alien series back on track as well).


    Getting back to Star Trek II- I can see where you are coming from as it seems like a copout to bring Spock back in the third film. Honestly I'm glad they did. While Nimoy's performance in Star Trek II was fantastic, his work in The Motion Picture was forgettable. I would not have liked that to be his only "other" Trek film.

    Spock dying and being brought back was not the first time a main character "cheated" death- Nomad restored Scotty after it killed him. And Chekov was shot to death in Spectre of the Gun, only to magically be okay at the end without much explanation.

    Actually I'm trying to think of an occasion (at least in Trek) in which a main character died and "stayed" dead. Sarek was the first one I believe.

    I think the only "death" I could really relate to this topic would be Kirk's death in "Generations." Frankly he had become too old for the role and it was fitting for him to go saving the day one last time (a cheesy ripoff of Spock's death mind you... but at least he stayed dead. :lol). I don't think I would have been too impressed if they filmed Shatners book "The Return" and brought back Captain Kirk. :rolleyes

    Anyway I think I've rambled enough. :lol


    EDIT- Man I just read that after "Generations" Shatner pitched the idea to Paramount of Kirk being brought back to life by the Borg for the next Trek film. Am I ever glad they didn't!


    Kevin
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2012
  14. talye05

    talye05 New Member

    Trophy Points:
    3
    Sometimes a sequel can be okay. I think it's when they start pumping out two or more poorly-plotted (in other words, it feels like they were just trying to make something up on the spot so they could revisit the characters/setting of the original) sequels that it can turn loving a movie into loathing it. I love Disney movies, but so many of their sequels are poorly-done, in my opinion anyways.
     
  15. outlander

    outlander Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,671
    Alien 3 was a disappointment to me....
    Superman 3 & 4 were painful.

    But nothing has ever sucked as badly as Highlander II.
     
  16. Leigh

    Leigh Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    When ever anyone mentions bad sequels to me, I think JAWS!! :lol
    For me, the first one was an absolute masterpeice! but the sequels were poor, especially number 4 which IMO was horrifically poor in every way!

    I love the original Jaws! to me the sequels do cast a bit of a shadow over it, but I dont really love it any less :)
     
  17. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    I can't remember where but I read an article with Fincher.

    He explained his take on A3 and it totally changed the movie for me.

    I didn't care for it all when released, but now I enjoy it.
     
  18. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    @micdavis,

    Do you happen to remember where you saw that article? I'd be curious to see it.


    Re: the general question,

    For me, yeah, a bad sequel/prequel can absolutely diminish my enjoyment of the original. I have no idea why this is, and I really wish it weren't the case. But...it is. I mean, I can usually still enjoy the original, but I can't "unsee" the lousy later entry, usually.

    That effect, however, can be minimized if the sequel/prequel is less connected to the central story of the originals. For example, someone mentioned Jaws and the lousy sequels. Jaws, to me, stands on its own just fine. There are no open questions at the end, no lingering "but what happened next?" feeling. The shark dies (oh, sorry, spoiler alert...), and that's that. For me, that makes it easier to ignore the sequels.

    By contrast, the Matrix sequels heavily hurt my enjoyment of the originals. Why? Because I still had that "What happened next?" sense after the first one, and the sequels were just a real disappointment or "meh" at best.

    Some of it, I think, also has to do with my enjoyment of the original and how I connect to it. I like Jaws. I don't LOVE Jaws. I like Highlander, but I don't LOVE it. Thus, for me, the crappy later entries are easier to ignore. But I LOVE Alien and Aliens, and Alien3 (and resurrection) just didn't do it for me. I pretend they don't exist. I've seen A3 once. Literally. Saw it in the theater, don't recall ever watching it again. Resurrection I've seen a couple times, but more to try to "make" myself like it. It didn't work.

    And then there's Star Wars. The original films are in a category unto themselves, and my experience with those films is markedly different from almost any other film franchise. For me, I could ignore the prequels. Really, I could. But I can't ignore the constant tinkering, not least because Lucas won't LET me ignore it by giving me some archival version of the originals adapted for modern viewing conditions (IE: not the "official ebay rips" from 2006). THAT has almost killed my love of those films. I still enjoy them, but they're about this close to being "just" movies for me, when they originally were much more. I suppose part of me holds out hope that Lucas' business instinct will override his artistic instinct and he'll finally release a cleaned-up ORIGINAL version of the films.


    Anyway, I suppose folks' mileage may vary. I do honestly envy people's ability to still fully enjoy the original even after seeing a lousy sequel/prequel. It's my inability to do so that has kept me from watching the fourth Indy film. I don't feel like I'm missing much, but I am curious. Although, I know that once I watch it, I'll never be able to "unsee" it, so it's easier for me to just pretend it doesn't exist and retain my enjoyment of the first three.
     
  19. Shadow345

    Shadow345 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    566
    Do lousy remakes, which have no continuity with the original film, ruin your enjoyment of a movie in the same way a lousy sequel would?

    A lot of people get really upset over bad remakes.
     
  20. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    After playing Mass Effect 3, I can safely say that yes, a sequel can ruin the original.
     
  21. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    I get annoyed by them, yeah, definitely. But not because they affect the original. Remakes are actually totally separate for me, which I recognize really makes no logical sense. It's just another movie right? Well, no. For me, remakes or reboots are separate.

    What * me off about remakes/reboots is the lack of originality and the fact that a bunch of money, time, and effort was spent making a knockoff of something that was already just fine on its own, when it could have been spent telling something new. Plus, many times, remakes/reboots suck, which of course only proves that the film was a "remake" purely to capitalize on the strength of the brand name of the original, rather than because the story was worth a *.

    The way I see it, if you are remaking a film, you have to ask yourself why. What's the point? What are you going to bring to the party that's better/wasn't done the last time? If your film/story is good enough to stand on its own, why aren't you making your own movie? If it ISN'T good enough to stand on its own, ought that not be enough reason NOT to make the film?

    Obviously people go ahead and make them anyway, because viewers are undiscriminating and don't really care, but that's why I get * about remakes -- not because they hurt the original. Because they don't hold a candle to it and are a waste.
     
  22. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355
    Oddly, no, not at all. I can be disgusted with them, deride them, mock them, but remakes I can keep emotionally segregated from the originals easily.
     
  23. Wakeem

    Wakeem Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    866
    I think on first viewing a sequel/prequel can harm the original. But if you let time pass and forget the sequel/prequel everything will be as it should be. So, I can't remember anything about Alien 3 or 4 at this point. I've almost forgotten about the Star Wars prequels. I just own Attack of the Clones and although I like a few scenes part of me wants to take a bat to it. Terminator 3 & 4 are completely forgotten as well. The same goes for The Thing 2011.
     
  24. SSgt Burton

    SSgt Burton Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    I agree...

    But I would also say that Starship Troopers II gave Highlander II a run for its money for worst sequel ever.


    Touching on Alien3- the special "workprint" edition is an improvement over the theatrical release (it even restores an entire subplot deleted from the original release):

    Halfway through the film they actually manage to capture the Alien in a giant vault. However Golic truly is insane and believes the Alien is his God. He murders the inmate watching the vault door, and releases the Alien planning to convince it to "go with him" and kill Ripley (who Golic believes is responsible for all the unrest in the prison). The alien immediately has Golic for lunch.

    And after watching all the documentaries on the horror Fincher and the crew went through to complete the film on time, I have a greater understanding of why it turned out the way it did.

    However beyond all this I still like A3 as I feel it was a fitting end to the Ripley character; sacrificing herself in the name of saving humanity from the evil of WY who want to harness the Alien as a weapon.


    I would loved to have seen the "Monks and the Wooden Planet" version of A3 filmed. ;)


    Kevin
     
  25. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    I do agree that, over time, bad sequels/prequels fade and you can go back to the originals....but you can never unsee them. As a result, I've taken to being VERY selective in which sequels/prequels I watch for film franchises I enjoy, especially in this age of latter-day entries into once long-dead series.
     
  26. Psab keel

    Psab keel Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    An interesting debate really.

    I would say that while I certainly enjoy the original Star Wars Trilogy, Indiana Jones Trilogy, and Terminator Franchise, etc that there is something lost. A bad sequel, prequel, or relentless unnecessary alteration certainly does have a negative effect on my love of a film series. It's difficult to remove myself enough from the changes/ bad choices to not be adversely affected by them. Let's face it, we all love these kinds of movies! If we didn't, forums like this wouldn't exist, and we wouldn't debate endlessly about the films that inspired us. No one can deny that fact, and if you do, you're being willfully ignorant.

    But with that being said, that's why I choose to keep my collection of films to be the versions that I grew and fell in love with. With the exception of having high def captures and up to date pictures for prop, costume, and model replications, I try and keep my collection to the kinds of source materials that I had at the peak of my fandom. And by peak, I mean the time where I felt so confident in the abilities of my favorite directors that to me they could do no wrong.

    Its been really fun to rekindle that sense of wonder by having source materials or novels, or resources that at the time I wished could have been more in depth, or had better pictures of the props/ costumes I'd always loved. Part of what makes that sense of wonder reignite is the fact that they didn't have all the information I wanted. It brings me back to a time where my imagination could fill in the gaps and in my mind I could come up with any story I felt fit into the context of what I did know.

    In some ways it's been really great to explore new films in series that I love. It was exciting to go see the prequels on opening night. Who wouldn't be? This was a BRAND NEW STAR WARS MOVIE! But when they were over, I think a lot of what disappointed me was the fact that it cemented what would considered canon. And there was no undoing that. Now what I'd imagined would never be.

    While we should choose to be knowledgeable, in the case of fantasy and imaginative story telling, sometimes less is more. To be able to fill in those gaps that we never knew with our own stories was a huge part of what made us love those films so much. With the advent of DVD and the internet, it has been a boon to those of us who want to create and own a piece of our favorite worlds. Now we can source exact materials for our replicas. But while that has given us great leaps and bounds into having the best props, models, and costumes available, we've also traded our sense of wonder for it.

    So to those who still lament the lousy follow-ups, let down prequels, or alterations of their favorite films I suggest to think of a time where it seemed like there was nothing else in the world more important than those movies you loved growing up. Think long and hard about the storybooks you used to collect, or the expanded universe novels you used to read, the action figures you used to display, or the magazines that had great photos of the props and costumes you loved so much. Buy them. You don't need all of them. Just the ones that mattered most to you. The books that you read over and over. Even if they don't hold up to your story telling sensibilities as an adult just revisit them as a way to remember that excitement you felt when you first read them. And watch the movies. The versions you sat and watched growing up, thinking all the while how exciting it was to see Luke Skywalker ignite his lightsaber for the first time. Or watching Indiana Jones outrun that giant boulder in the beginning of Raiders. More often than not, what we miss about those first excited viewings of our favorite film were the memories attached to them.

    There are reasons for why we love these things, and thankfully those reasons tend to run far deeper, and hold a place in our hearts that goes far beyond any disappointment from a lackluster sequel. Those reasons are really memories, and we can access them anytime we want.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2012
  27. TheDoctor

    TheDoctor Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,036
    Sequels - Yes, by all means, let's move a story forward.

    Prequels / Reboots / Remakes - For the most part NO.

    I've never seen a prequel where I thought "That added something extra to the story!" Prequels are a waste of time.

    Reboots/Remakes - allow at LEAST 50 years before rebooting or remaking a movie. Origin story reboot/remakes are the WORST. How many times must we endure the origin story of Spiderman or Superman? How about 50 years from now? If you're going to do a reboot, at least start in the middle of the story, now "how it all began" - I don't care how it all began, I want to see the crew of the Enterprise in the middle of their journey. I get doing it on a TV series (though it might be more interesting if the crew had known each other for 10 years by the time we start the story), but movies should be about moving stories forward, not backward.


    To answer your original question - YES. How many of us saw the first Matrix movie and thought it was awesome.... then saw the sequels and now you can't bear to see the first one because you know the crap that comes later? I KNOW there's a fair number of people who can't stand to look at Darth Vadar in 4,5,6 because they know who/what he is in 1,2,3. Anybody sick of Spiderman/Superman/Hulk?
     
  28. darthwhitey

    darthwhitey Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,635
    Agreed.

    I've only seen Matrix 2 & 3 once. They are pretty much dead to me as the first one was so superior.

    I feel the same about the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise...all down hill after #1.

    As bad as they are they don't hurt the greatness of the first one.
     
  29. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355

    Well, except that what I was talking about was reboots/remakes, not sequels. Bad sequels kill some bit of love for the whole of the work for me. We actually are on polar opposites as far as bad sequeles :lol
     
  30. outlander

    outlander Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,671
    I agree with Solo's contention that the scale of horror depends largely on the degree of like or love for the original. My problem is that I really LOVEd Highlander. The blatant stupidity of Highlander II felt like an insult. It felt like someone had stolen money from me: "Here's some half-baked crap we came up with. You really liked the original, so we think you should give us more of your money to see this steaming pile of crap."

    And I fell for it. And eventually I fell into the "Ravenous Buglatter Beast of Traal Defese", ie: if I do not watch the sequels, they will not know I exist therefore I do not have to acknowledge that they do exist nor that they ever existed.

    For some reason, the Matrix movies are different for me. I don't despise the sequels. They don't diminish the greatness of the original and if I surf across an interesting portion I may sample a few minutes of the eyecandy. It's almost as if you ran across a singer who had one awesome great life-changing song and then the rest of their recording career was nothing but B-sides. Perfectly servicable music, just nothing you'd pay to download from ITunes.

    But Highlander II... it's like that singer crashed your party uninvited, urinated into the punchbowl, vomited on the bed where your guests had stored their jackets, then forced their way on stage where your buddy's band is performing quite admirably for the enjoyment of your guests. Then he blows out their amplifiers with one ghastly ear splitting howl that shatters every window on your house. But he didn't crash your party, YOU invited him because you loved that first song so much. You feel like a fool and now you don't even enjoy hearing what WAS your favorite song.

    That is Highlander II.
     
  31. darthwhitey

    darthwhitey Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,635

    :lol:lol:lol

    Could you be more descriptive?

    Seriously, a great and funny post! :thumbsup
     
  32. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    Outlander, your experience with Highlander is similar to my experience with other films, so I think there must be a factor involved here where the degree you like/love the original is the degree to which you dislike/hate the new one.

    I LIKED Highlander but didn't LOVE it so much that the sequels ruin it for me. Plus, it stands pretty well on its own. If they'd never made a sequel, nobody would've thought "But what happened next?!"

    Other films I've loved, though...ugh. Just...ruined for me by lousy subsequent entries. Sometimes they can come back around for me, but not all that often.
     
  33. Dave Ward

    Dave Ward Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,476
    Took me a bit of thinking through.

    For me, the crappy follow up does spoil the original when I'm watching the crappy film. When I'm watching the original however, it's not spoiled by the knowledge of the existence of the pre/sequel. Does that make sense?
     
  34. Psab keel

    Psab keel Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    The Matrix is an anomaly. Pun fully intended.

    The original was great because the Wachowski Brothers stole the idea from a short story, the author of which, sued them and won. The sequels were garbage because they wrote them themselves and they were just bad movies. I really don't care for them as directors. V for Vendetta wasn't too bad and I still love the first Matrix, though I have a hard time watching it sometimes because it was spoofed so many times that the effects look really dated to me. But it's still entertaining, and I can enjoy it.
     
  35. batmann539

    batmann539 Active Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    441
    I couldn't agree more. I was first in line to see Highlander II and I hated it so much I can't really enjoy Highlander anymore. Even after the Director's Cut where they try and fix the story it still sucks.

    Sean
     
  36. rodneyfaile

    rodneyfaile Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,980
    After seeing a really good prequel or sequel, I've heard some say it INCREASED their enjoyment of the original, so I don't see why the opposite isn't possible.
     

Share This Page