PDA

View Full Version : Which Films Deserved Sequels?



The Devil Man
10-14-2006, 08:20 PM
This is a super simple topic from your beloved Devil Man!

Which films do you so, so, soooooo wish had a sequel? There must be some films you wish had sequels, right?

I wish Blade Runner had a sequel. That's one film that Needs a sequel to explain the mysteries of the first movie.

And... okay, it is a trilogy already, but I wish Lord of the Rings had a sequel. The Hobbit will be a movie one day, but I'd love to see a movie of the whole 'Akklabeth' Saga in The Silmarillion. You know how it goes... Sauron gets captured, taken to Numenor, tricks the King, the King sails to some island he isn't supposed to, and BOOM! :eek: Numenor gets whipped by the Gods and Sauron loses his body. That would make a great trilogy of it's own (For all the Tolkein fan-boys, yeah, don't get mad at the quick summing up) I wanna see more Tolkein movies! (Alright... they would be prequels, but you get the picture...)

Thats all I can think of for now. What about you?

Oh! And... yeah, you can add a sequel to a film that already has a sequel because... well... then, in your opinion, it is a film that still deserved a sequel, geddit? :spin:

Here's another one... I wish Terminator 2 had a decent sequel and not the pile of crap that was Terminator 3. I wish it had a true sequel with James Cameron behind the camera.

XxSephirothxX
10-14-2006, 09:08 PM
Serenity really deserved a sequel. Of course, with Whedon, there's still hope, but he's stated that nothing's going to be happening anytime soon. The movie just didn't perform adequately at the box office. It's a shame, considering how fantastic it was.

Miriel
10-14-2006, 09:14 PM
Serenity really deserved a sequel. Of course, with Whedon, there's still hope, but he's stated that nothing's going to be happening anytime soon. The movie just didn't perform adequately at the box office. It's a shame, considering how fantastic it was.

They should just bring back Firefly, dammit! Although it's not the same without Wash and Book. :(

Vincent, Thunder God
10-15-2006, 01:42 AM
This is a more of a mini-series, but I would love to see a sequel to "the 10th Kingdom."

Also, this is rather random, but if "Labyrinth" had had a sequel or sequels in the 1980s, I would have enjoyed that.

Madame Adequate
10-15-2006, 02:17 AM
Most awesome movies I want more of are awesome because they have a great plot ie they tie up loose ends and don't leave room for a sequel unless it was already designed that way and thus said sequel exists. Everything I can think of would require a plot contrivance so daft it'd ruin the first movie.

Tavrobel
10-15-2006, 04:31 AM
And... okay, it is a trilogy already, but I wish Lord of the Rings had a sequel. The Hobbit will be a movie one day, but I'd love to see a movie of the whole 'Akklabeth' Saga in The Silmarillion. You know how it goes... Sauron gets captured, taken to Numenor, tricks the King, the King sails to some island he isn't supposed to, and BOOM! :eek: Numenor gets whipped by the Gods and Sauron loses his body. That would make a great trilogy of it's own (For all the Tolkein fan-boys, yeah, don't get mad at the quick summing up) I wanna see more Tolkein movies! (Alright... they would be prequels, but you get the picture...)

No, the the Silmarillion would make a horrible series of movies. The only main character you could have in the movie would be Ulmo, and that invalidates the movie right then and there, because Ulmo's thought of mind does not change (his personality). You might be able to make a movie out of Narn i Hin Hurn or the story of Beren/Luthien in the Lay of Leithian, but those stories are only twenty pages long (longer if you include the extra stuff from the third history book, and Unfinished Tales). You would spend more time on the exposition than the story itself, which is a poor way to make a movie.

The Akallabeth would also suck, because the history of the Downfall of Numenor takes place over three-thousand years; fifteen-hundred of those are not cast under the shadow at all. The only story to tell is Aldarion and Erendis, which is not something that could be something that anyone could relate to. And Sauron only appears within the last two-hundred years of the Downfall. If you turned that into a movie, 1000 years per hour, Sauron would only appear for three minutes, INCLUDING what happened in Middle-Earth simultaneously (which does play a part, whether you like it or not), and plot exposition? Fail.

They had enough trouble turning a saga over the course of nineteen years into an eleven and a half hour movie. Let's compare:
Second Age, 3441 years
First Age, years of the Sun
Years of the Valar
Before the World

I'm clocking over ninety-eight-thousand, six-hundred-forty hours worth of movie. TV shows combined, even with spin-offs, don't even last that long. And then you have time expansion and time compression, plot exposition, plot play out, multiple climaxes (not a sexual connotation), denoument, credits. Yeah, because I'm going to have the time to watch a one-million hour movie. I'm not going to be around for hree millenia, now am I?

I agree with MILF, most movies I could think of that warrant a sequel would destroy it.

I'd rather see a movie about a prince of cats.

Araciel
10-15-2006, 05:28 AM
i'll tell ya which movie should not have had a sequel....shanghai noon...good god the sequel was horrible. oh and they never should have made the two D&D movies that are out...though the second was leagues better than the first.

as for sequels i WANT to see....the star wars expanded universe maybe? see what happens to luke/leia/han afterwards

tan
10-15-2006, 08:31 AM
I wish Battle Royale didn't have such a crappy sequel that made no sense :(

Rainecloud
10-15-2006, 08:49 AM
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. :p

Levian
10-15-2006, 12:15 PM
I wish Battle Royale didn't have such a crappy sequel that made no sense :(

Yeah, I was so disappointed.

I'm also glad Saw got a sequel, even though they've gotten a bad reputation for some reason. I liked them both.

Spiffing Cheese
10-15-2006, 12:58 PM
I can't think of anything, but Speed just so completely shouldn't have had a sequel.

Sergeant Hartman
10-15-2006, 01:10 PM
Godzilla needed a sequel, but it wouldn't be as good as the first one.

Madame Adequate
10-15-2006, 01:32 PM
I'm also glad Saw got a sequel, even though they've gotten a bad reputation for some reason. I liked them both.

Because they're really bad movies? xD


I wish Battle Royale didn't have such a crappy sequel that made no sense :(

I wish the original BR had properly exposed Kiriyama. Until I found it out from elsewhere, he really pissed on the movie, because he was a total deus ex machina who ruined pretty much everything for no literary reason, only to get rid of characters.

Rye
10-15-2006, 01:34 PM
Napoleon Dynamite could so sequal well because, considering the fact that it had almost NO plot to it, the plot couldn't be ruined, so it'd just be up to the creators to keep up on the humor of it. I love ND. :bigsmile:

Madame Adequate
10-15-2006, 01:41 PM
Napoleon Dynamite could so sequal well because, considering the fact that it had almost NO plot to it, the plot couldn't be ruined, so it'd just be up to the creators to keep up on the humor of it. I love ND. :bigsmile:

That is a good point.

He could enter a stallion raising contest or something. :jess:

Slothy
10-15-2006, 01:44 PM
Serenity really deserved a sequel. Of course, with Whedon, there's still hope, but he's stated that nothing's going to be happening anytime soon. The movie just didn't perform adequately at the box office. It's a shame, considering how fantastic it was.

Agreed. If we're lucky, maybe it'll get another chance. If not, then at least we got Serenity in the first place. That was more than I had hoped for when Firefly was cancelled.

Levian
10-15-2006, 01:55 PM
I'm also glad Saw got a sequel, even though they've gotten a bad reputation for some reason. I liked them both.

Because they're really bad movies? xD



Is not! :mad2:

Seriously though, I really like how well the plot is thought out, which is rare in movies these days, and especially within the genre. Most stories in horror movies completely sucks, and most of them are supernatural. But I know I'm against the majority here, everyone hates Saw. :(

I hope they don't stink it up with Saw 3.

Faris
10-15-2006, 04:53 PM
Most movies are in no need of a sequel. Unless they end on a cliff hanger, then that's a different story.

Novaris
10-15-2006, 05:12 PM
TITANIC!!!!!!!

To be seriously honest I would choose "The Crow" the first one with Brandon Lee, not these spinoffs. A sequel that continues the Story of Eric Draven, where he is once again returned from his eternal rest to solve the injustice that prevents his soul passing through. Brilliant movie though.

udsuna
10-15-2006, 05:35 PM
NO!!!!! NO SEQUELS!!!!


I wouldn't inflict that on any good movie. All the sequels in the last decade have been SO HORRIBLE that they actually made the original worse. I can't watch the original Star Wars anymore, not after seeing the prequels. :cry:

Griff
10-15-2006, 08:13 PM
I'm still waiting for Spaceballs 2: The Search for More Money!

In all seriousness though, I wouldn't mind a Breakfast Club sequel to show what happened to them the next monday. That way I wouldn't have to write fanfics to do it.

~SapphireStar~
10-15-2006, 08:16 PM
I'd like Withnail & I to have had a sequel. I so wanted to know what Withnail did when I left for his acting job.

Jimsour
10-15-2006, 11:22 PM
Enter the dragon.. too bad bruce lee wasnt around to make a sequel eh?

Araciel
10-15-2006, 11:24 PM
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. :p

you're serious?? i thought it was ok...but sequel?

feioncastor
10-16-2006, 03:01 AM
I've heard rumors of a Passion of the Christ 2.

Pant Leg Eater from the Bad World
10-16-2006, 05:23 AM
Super Mario Bros. 2

'Nuff said.

Bart's Friend Milhouse
10-17-2006, 05:52 PM
I'm sure if a sequel needs to be made it would have been made already