Terminator 2
The Evening Star
Clerks II
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
The Evening Star better than Terms of Endearment? I didn't watch The Evening Star because of the very poor reviews but now I will keep an eye if it is shown on telly.
The Lion in Winter, a sequel to Becket.
Miracle of Morgan's Creek, a sequel to The Great McGinty.
Actually, I'm surprised that Silence of the Lambs hasn't shown up here yet. It's a sequel to Manhunter (Red Dragon), isn't it? (For what it's worth, I prefer Manhunter to Silence of the Lambs, but most seem to prefer otherwise).
Not true about Silence being a sequel to Manhunter. It was a standalone movie based on a different book completely...Manhunter was based on the book Red Dragon (which was later remade as Red Dragon with Hopkins starring, just to confuse matters eve further). Silence was based on the book of the same name.
It was also made by completely different filmmakers, film companies and actors.
But it does raise an interesting question though - should we class films based on books by the same author and with the same character as sequels? Such as the Bourne series, the Jack Ryan series, even Harry Potter? After all, such movies don't have numbers after the title, they are never officially called sequels in the title either.
The Evening Star better than Terms of Endearment? I didn't watch The Evening Star because of the very poor reviews but now I will keep an eye if it is shown on telly.
I like it more than Terms of Endearment. You should definitely give The Evening Star a go, it's really not as bad as it's made out to be.
Thank you, I will as I am a fan of Shirley and I like Terms of Endearment very much. The Evening Star was shown on one of the freeview movie channels a while back but I missed it, hopefully next time.
Not even close to superior just popcorn fun movies, you may prefer them, but that is different to them being superior.
I agree.
I don't care what anyone says. The original Alien is a much much better movie than Aliens. More action doesn't mean better or superior. Anyway we've already had the Alien vs Aliens debate on the other thread and Alien won hands down.
Superman 2.
That's about the only one I can think of.
There isn't many films where I prefer the sequels.
I don't care what anyone says. The original Alien is a much much better movie than Aliens. More action doesn't mean better or superior. Anyway we've already had the Alien vs Aliens debate on the other thread and Alien won hands down.
Lol, no it didn't. Everyone, apart from you, agreed that both are great movies, and their enjoyment depends very much on what type of movie the viewer is in the mood for at the time.
Lol, no it didn't. Everyone, apart from you, agreed that both are great movies, and their enjoyment depends very much on what type of movie the viewer is in the mood for at the time.
I wasn't the only one.
dearmrman (post no.26) agreed and then even you replied saying that you recognised Alien was superior but prefered watching Aliens. Oh well, looks like it's me and dearmrman against the rest.:)
I wasn't the only one.
dearmrman (post no.26) agreed and then even you replied saying that you recognised Alien was superior but prefered watching Aliens. Oh well, looks like it's me and dearmrman against the rest.:)
I didn't reconsider anything. I said Alien is superior in several ways (suspense & horror) whilst Aliens is superior in others (pace and action). Each movie does its own thing very well, but if, say, you're in the mood for a fast paced action then Alien wouldn't cut the mustard, and vice versa.
Why do you have to be against anyone? You could just accept and respect other people's opinions, is that too much to ask?
Oh look. The thread has been derailed by people not understanding that anything said is pure opinion.
There's nothing wrong with someone saying "Terminator 2 and Aliens are superior". You might not agree with it, but do they have to preface it with "IMHO" just to prevent causing hideous offence?
I find the statement that Alien is more worthy than Aliens because it has suspense rather than action particularly nonsensical. And the comment that Aliens is a "popcorn movie" (and this is supposed to negate anything said about it) is pure laziness.
Oh look. The thread has been derailed by people not understanding that anything said is pure opinion.
There's nothing wrong with someone saying "Terminator 2 and Aliens are superior". You might not agree with it, but do they have to preface it with "IMHO" just to prevent causing hideous offence?
I find the statement that Alien is more worthy than Aliens because it has suspense rather than action particularly nonsensical. And the comment that Aliens is a "popcorn movie" (and this is supposed to negate anything said about it) is pure laziness.
Now, can we get back on topic?
I do love the way you say that the thread has been derailed by people not understanding that anything said is PURE OPINION, then in the next breath complain that someone said Alien is better than Aliens because of the suspense factor.
Aliens is one of the worst sequels ever.
It's characters are completely unlikeable which is something I find astonishing that the pro Aliens fans can't seem to see.
It's full of shit dialogue, every sentence ending in "man" to make all the characters sound 'cool' or 'in with times' or whatever. John Hurt, Ian Holm, Sigourney Weaver and all the rest in the original spoke to each other like normal people speak to each other. James Cameron must have had a encyclopaedia of action film clichés which for some reason most people love but I HATE. Nobody talks like that to each other in real life and if they don't then doesn't it come across to you as fake or sound silly, but let's not let that get in the way of people running around shooting anything that moves just for action sake eh?. The one good thing that Aliens did was make me appreciate the original even more. Aliens will never be in my DVD collection. Awful film. 0/10.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad film, I rewatched it again on blu ray recently...but I thought it tried to be too epic and ambitious and it just didn't come off...plus some obvious stunt casting with Tina Turner, and those annoying bloody kids.
Another big downside was the humour in the film, and softening of Max, turning him into some sort of kindergarten teacher...the softer side of the character had already been hinted at in 2, with his protectiveness towards the Feral kid, and there was some sardonic humour in that film, and Bruce Spence's character also provided some humour...but the subject and nature of the movies for me worked better when such elements were kept to a minimum.
Yeah average at best.Too Hollywood.I don't think there was anything wrong with the concept,it was actually quite good and there was nothing wrong with it having a tribe of children.It was the Disney-style tone of the film.It had none of the brutality of the first two.The first two aren't actually that violent but people think they are because a lot of the violence is implied and they have a dirty,gritty look and feel to them.The third has none of this.The villians were more like villians in a pantomime and the kids were too cutesy when they should have been savage like the feral kid.It would've been interesting to see that film as a purely Australian movie and not a sequel that was taken over by Hollywood.Mel Gibson himself has said that it's his least favourite.He just didn't get the tone and he felt it was more like a long music video.The imaginitive fight in the thunderdome and some of the scenery - mainly the brilliant shot of Sydney Harbour in ruins,are about the only things I like about it.
I do love the way you say that the thread has been derailed by people not understanding that anything said is PURE OPINION, then in the next breath complain that someone said Alien is better than Aliens because of the suspense factor.
Aliens is one of the worst sequels ever.
It's characters are completely unlikeable which is something I find astonishing that the pro Aliens fans can't seem to see.
It's full of shit dialogue, every sentence ending in "man" to make all the characters sound 'cool' or 'in with times' or whatever. John Hurt, Ian Holm, Sigourney Weaver and all the rest in the original spoke to each other like normal people speak to each other. James Cameron must have had a encyclopaedia of action film clichés which for some reason most people love but I HATE. Nobody talks like that to each other in real life and if they don't then doesn't it come across to you as fake or sound silly, but let's not let that get in the way of people running around shooting anything that moves just for action sake eh?. The one good thing that Aliens did was make me appreciate the original even more. Aliens will never be in my DVD collection. Awful film. 0/10.
Try reading my comment again, yeah?
I said *irrespective of whether one film was more suspensful than the other*, that does not actually mean a damn thing in regards to quality so you really need to come up with a better reason as to why it's better if you're going to back up your argument.
You've since launched into a diatribe about the film so at least I have some decent reaosns beyond "No suspense, so it's rubbish". Fair enough.
0/10 tells me you haven't watched many movies though...
I wasn't the only one.
dearmrman (post no.26) agreed and then even you replied saying that you recognised Alien was superior but prefered watching Aliens. Oh well, looks like it's me and dearmrman against the rest.:)
I'd be wary of using dearmrman's opinion to bolster your own. He's said on another thread that Die Hard is a film so bad that he can't believe it exists so I don't think he really knows much about films at all.:D
I said *irrespective of whether one film was more suspensful than the other*, that does not actually mean a damn thing in regards to quality so you really need to come up with a better reason as to why it's better if you're going to back up your argument.
You've since launched into a diatribe about the film so at least I have some decent reaosns beyond "No suspense, so it's rubbish". Fair enough.
0/10 tells me you haven't watched many movies though...
I've watched hundreds of films of all genres in my time.
It's a shame some people in here are trying their hardest to ruin the thread with their silly attitudes. Trying to act like someone else's opinion is wrong, that's not how opinions work. You disagree? Fair enough, but you're not more right than they are.
Same goes for acting like someone has no right to feel a way about a film because you dislike their reasons? So bloody what?
Gosh, it's a thread where people share their views on films, why do some people always have to get on their high horses and act like they have some level of authority that nobody actually does?
I'd be wary of using dearmrman's opinion to bolster your own. He's said on another thread that Die Hard is a film so bad that he can't believe it exists so I don't think he really knows much about films at all.:D
I wasn't been serious, as I later said.
I enjoy Aliens & Terminator 2, but they are not as good as the originals, in my opinion. Would I rather watch Alien or Aliens, that would just depend on what mood I was in, but would always certainly watch Terminator over it's sequel.
Comments
The Evening Star better than Terms of Endearment? I didn't watch The Evening Star because of the very poor reviews but now I will keep an eye if it is shown on telly.
I do prefer The Evening Star's poster though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Evening_star.jpg
Not true about Silence being a sequel to Manhunter. It was a standalone movie based on a different book completely...Manhunter was based on the book Red Dragon (which was later remade as Red Dragon with Hopkins starring, just to confuse matters eve further). Silence was based on the book of the same name.
It was also made by completely different filmmakers, film companies and actors.
But it does raise an interesting question though - should we class films based on books by the same author and with the same character as sequels? Such as the Bourne series, the Jack Ryan series, even Harry Potter? After all, such movies don't have numbers after the title, they are never officially called sequels in the title either.
I like it more than Terms of Endearment. You should definitely give The Evening Star a go, it's really not as bad as it's made out to be.
Thank you, I will as I am a fan of Shirley and I like Terms of Endearment very much. The Evening Star was shown on one of the freeview movie channels a while back but I missed it, hopefully next time.
I don't care what anyone says. The original Alien is a much much better movie than Aliens. More action doesn't mean better or superior. Anyway we've already had the Alien vs Aliens debate on the other thread and Alien won hands down.
Superman 2.
That's about the only one I can think of.
There isn't many films where I prefer the sequels.
Lol, no it didn't. Everyone, apart from you, agreed that both are great movies, and their enjoyment depends very much on what type of movie the viewer is in the mood for at the time.
dearmrman (post no.26) agreed and then even you replied saying that you recognised Alien was superior but prefered watching Aliens. Oh well, looks like it's me and dearmrman against the rest.:)
I didn't reconsider anything. I said Alien is superior in several ways (suspense & horror) whilst Aliens is superior in others (pace and action). Each movie does its own thing very well, but if, say, you're in the mood for a fast paced action then Alien wouldn't cut the mustard, and vice versa.
Why do you have to be against anyone? You could just accept and respect other people's opinions, is that too much to ask?
There's nothing wrong with someone saying "Terminator 2 and Aliens are superior". You might not agree with it, but do they have to preface it with "IMHO" just to prevent causing hideous offence?
I find the statement that Alien is more worthy than Aliens because it has suspense rather than action particularly nonsensical. And the comment that Aliens is a "popcorn movie" (and this is supposed to negate anything said about it) is pure laziness.
Now, can we get back on topic?
Lethal Weapon 2
Aliens is one of the worst sequels ever.
It's characters are completely unlikeable which is something I find astonishing that the pro Aliens fans can't seem to see.
It's full of shit dialogue, every sentence ending in "man" to make all the characters sound 'cool' or 'in with times' or whatever. John Hurt, Ian Holm, Sigourney Weaver and all the rest in the original spoke to each other like normal people speak to each other. James Cameron must have had a encyclopaedia of action film clichés which for some reason most people love but I HATE. Nobody talks like that to each other in real life and if they don't then doesn't it come across to you as fake or sound silly, but let's not let that get in the way of people running around shooting anything that moves just for action sake eh?. The one good thing that Aliens did was make me appreciate the original even more. Aliens will never be in my DVD collection. Awful film. 0/10.
Yeah average at best.Too Hollywood.I don't think there was anything wrong with the concept,it was actually quite good and there was nothing wrong with it having a tribe of children.It was the Disney-style tone of the film.It had none of the brutality of the first two.The first two aren't actually that violent but people think they are because a lot of the violence is implied and they have a dirty,gritty look and feel to them.The third has none of this.The villians were more like villians in a pantomime and the kids were too cutesy when they should have been savage like the feral kid.It would've been interesting to see that film as a purely Australian movie and not a sequel that was taken over by Hollywood.Mel Gibson himself has said that it's his least favourite.He just didn't get the tone and he felt it was more like a long music video.The imaginitive fight in the thunderdome and some of the scenery - mainly the brilliant shot of Sydney Harbour in ruins,are about the only things I like about it.
Try reading my comment again, yeah?
I said *irrespective of whether one film was more suspensful than the other*, that does not actually mean a damn thing in regards to quality so you really need to come up with a better reason as to why it's better if you're going to back up your argument.
You've since launched into a diatribe about the film so at least I have some decent reaosns beyond "No suspense, so it's rubbish". Fair enough.
0/10 tells me you haven't watched many movies though...
I'd be wary of using dearmrman's opinion to bolster your own. He's said on another thread that Die Hard is a film so bad that he can't believe it exists so I don't think he really knows much about films at all.:D
Aliens
Shrek 2
Final Destination 2
Spiderman 2
Scary Movie 2
Police Academy 4
Toy Story 2
Same goes for acting like someone has no right to feel a way about a film because you dislike their reasons? So bloody what?
Gosh, it's a thread where people share their views on films, why do some people always have to get on their high horses and act like they have some level of authority that nobody actually does?
I agree. I prefer all the ones with joe pesci in rather than the original.
I quite fancy watching one now...
I wasn't been serious, as I later said.
I enjoy Aliens & Terminator 2, but they are not as good as the originals, in my opinion. Would I rather watch Alien or Aliens, that would just depend on what mood I was in, but would always certainly watch Terminator over it's sequel.
Rocky 3
Terminator 2