Whats been the most unnecessary sequel iyo?
I think the second Bridget Jones Diary "The Edge of Reason" was completely unnecessary. I didn't really care for the sequel to "Romancing the Stone" "The Jewel of the Nile" either. Both kind of took away from the entire point of the original film and cheapened the first film at it.
I think "Honey I Blew Up the Kid" which was the sequel to "Honey I Shrunk the Kids" was another one I could have done without ever seeing.
I think "Honey I Blew Up the Kid" which was the sequel to "Honey I Shrunk the Kids" was another one I could have done without ever seeing.
0
Comments
e.g.
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1528278
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1606825
The usual choices... the RoboCop sequels, the Highlander sequels, the Matrix sequels, etc.
I'd also add the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels.
Stakeout 2
As SFX remarked at the time: "What's next? Citizen Kane 2: Return
of the Sledge" ?
And dare I say 'Despicable Me 2'? It wasn't a terrible film but although I will continue to watch the first from time to time I can't see me ever watching the second again.
The Exorcist II: The Heretic.
Both were unutterably stupid, pointless and completely undid/rewrote things in the original. I do admit to a soft spot for "Beyond" though, purely for the awful effects and hilarious acting from people we know better as Oscar winners (Michael Caine, Sally Field, etc.)
I would add The Descent 2.
If we're talking about sequels that can truly be labelled as unnecessary, it's more about how contrived were the lengths the film-makers had to go to in terms of continuing a story that was seemingly finished.
With standard horror and action films, that's not all that difficult. It's just a matter of recreating the same circumstances with the same/some of the same/none of the same people. No, that doesn't make said sequels necessary, but I wouldn't consider any of the Saws, or Halloweens or Die Hards or whatever as contenders for the most unnecessary movies.
Although, with regard to one recent horror movie, the producers did make a rod for their own back by calling their movie "The Last Exorcism", which does make the upcoming sequel (yes, it's actually called "The Last Exorcism Part II") sound completely redundant. But having said that, I haven't seen the original so I can't really judge.
For me, the single most unnecessary sequel of all time was that which followed a film that could not have been wrapped up any tighter if it was invited to a bondage party at Christian Grey's house. the tagline for said movie is "There can be only one". And at the end of the movie, that's exactly what there was. Only one. Job done. All finished. Do not pass go. Do not collect £200. Do not lose your head.
And for that reason, Highlander 2 (and everything that followed it) must surely be recognised as the most unnecessary sequel of all time.
Debbie does the leeds inner ring road just didn't have the same ring to it.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skulls - why continue when Last Crusade was a perfect ending to the franchise.
Crocodile Dundee 2 and 3 - both rather lacklustre compared to the original.
Die Hard 4.0 - Meh. Leave John McLaine alone now please!
Twenty seconds into the second film and the bad guys have found the hidden city and dug up the mummys corpse which is still undead.
Shit film.
The most unnecessary sequel since....Aladdin 2.
Scary Movie 5
Big Momma's House 2 & 3
Terminator 3 (The story had been told, no need for more)
Beverly Hills Cop 3 (They're even making a fourth!)
Son of The Mask
Rather negates the title of the first one.
Die Hard 4.0 and that abysmal piece of shit that came out last year that was masquerading under the title of "Die Hard".