Worst movie sequel?

[Principled Man]

QUOTE (Mara @ Jun 30 2011, 03:40 PM)

"Smokey and The Bandit II" sucked like a Hoover, and the third one was even worse.

There was a Bandit III??

 

Cannonball Run suffered the same fate. The first was pretty good. Star-studded, very good-natured, screwball comedy.

 

The 2nd run?

[workingcinderellaman]

Crocodile Dundee 2

 

 

I actually voted for Jaws The Revenge. That one was pretty bad.

Edited June 30, 2011 by workingcinderellaman

[ILSnwdog]

[Mara]

[circumstantial tree]

I'm debating whether or not Poltergeist 2 was bad. It wasn't nearly as good as the first one, but I like the explanation in the sequel as to why Carol Anne was targeted by the spirit world.

 

and Henry Kane was one ugly and scary sonofabitch.

[ILSnwdog]

QUOTE (workingcinderellaman @ Jun 30 2011, 04:26 PM)

Crocodile Dundee 2 I actually voted for Jaws The Revenge. That one was pretty bad.

Yeah...but at least Linda Kozlowski was still in Croc II.

 

http://actresspictures.co.uk/scansk/kozlowski/Linda_Kozlowski-Crocodile_Dundee-08.jpg

 

She was pretty hot in those movies!

[Cowtothesky]

1. Dumber and Dumberer

2. Batman & Robin

 

They should not even have considered a Dumb & Dumber remake without Jim Carey on board. Jeff Daniels is more optional to me, but you have to have Carey. Although, it looks like Carey is accepting some bad scripts - seriously, penguins? Gah.

Batman & Robin was just pathetic.

[Griffon]

QUOTE (RUSHHEAD666 @ Jun 30 2011, 03:03 PM)

QUOTE (Griffon @ Jun 30 2011, 11:55 AM) I was just about to mention Halloween III, but someone got there first. Lord, that movie was so very, very, unnecessary. . . .oh, and now the "Silver Shamrock" thing is stuck in my head. You know you love this scene!!     "Watch the magic pumpkin....."     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thz8P0ZfcgY You set it up, I'll knock it down--there's only one response to that   I've heard a couple different things in regards to Halloween III. Either Carpenter wanted to experiment with it, or he really didn't want to do a second one and the third one was an attempt to deliberately tank the franchise (not that it worked)   In any event, yes, I do like Halloween III. It really is so goofy that it's lovable in a weird way.   EDIT: When I realised Troll 2 wasn't listed,

Edited July 1, 2011 by Griffon

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

"Caddyshack 2" was unwatchable. Still is.

[micgtr71]

Those are all pretty bad...I would like to offer Waynes Worlds 2 as well. The Smokey and the Bandit sequels were pretty horrid as well.

[Rush Cocky]

QUOTE (Mara @ Jun 30 2011, 01:38 PM)

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jun 30 2011, 01:36 PM) Caddyshack 2. That was easy. So obvious it had to be said twice. As easy as the Gamecocks winning the College World Series? I dunno.....those 2 extra inning games were real nailbiters.

[liddybuck01]

i'm surprised Grease 2 isn't on the list, even tho it's one of my most favorite movies ever!

 

is B&R actually worse than Batman Forever? had to chose. B&R had all of the terrible puns Arnold spouted off the entire movie. "have an ICE day." "COOL party." seriously, necessary?? praise the flying spaghetti monster for Chris Nolan for not leaving the franchise on that note.

 

 

i do have one argument with this thread tho. when you say "sequel", we should only pick from movies that only had a part 2, and not from movies that had many more than that, i.e., the mention of the Elm Street films. and fyi, part 3 is the best

 

 

anywhoo... even tho it's a silly movie, the second legally blonde is way worse than the first.

[Principled Man]

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jun 30 2011, 05:06 PM)

I'm debating whether or not Poltergeist 2 was bad. It wasn't nearly as good as the first one, but I like the explanation in the sequel as to why Carol Anne was targeted by the spirit world. and Henry Kane was one ugly and scary sonofabitch.

Poltergeist 2 was not horrible, but definitely way below the first, which was brilliant. What made the first film great (and very believable) was the strong family bond. The parents' love and their struggle to get back their daughter was a dominating force. In the sequel, that family bond wasn't nearly as evident.

 

Of course, Poltergeist 3 was an obscenity. Just how many times did they call for Carol Anne? A thousand? Ten thousand?

[JohnnyBlaze]

QUOTE (Workaholic Man @ Jul 1 2011, 12:01 PM)

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jun 30 2011, 05:06 PM) I'm debating whether or not Poltergeist 2 was bad. It wasn't nearly as good as the first one, but I like the explanation in the sequel as to why Carol Anne was targeted by the spirit world. and Henry Kane was one ugly and scary sonofabitch. Poltergeist 2 was not horrible, but definitely way below the first, which was brilliant. Poltergeist 2 I'd put in the Below Average zone but doesn't qualify as Horrible. Was there a reason why they totally wrote the eldest child (from part 1) completely out of part 2? I think the actress passed away before part 2 BUT to not even acknowledge her was odd.

[circumstantial tree]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 1 2011, 12:25 AM)

QUOTE (Workaholic Man @ Jul 1 2011, 12:01 PM) QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jun 30 2011, 05:06 PM) I'm debating whether or not Poltergeist 2 was bad. It wasn't nearly as good as the first one, but I like the explanation in the sequel as to why Carol Anne was targeted by the spirit world. and Henry Kane was one ugly and scary sonofabitch. Poltergeist 2 was not horrible, but definitely way below the first, which was brilliant. Poltergeist 2 I'd put in the Below Average zone but doesn't qualify as Horrible. Was there a reason why they totally wrote the eldest child (from part 1) completely out of part 2? I think the actress passed away before part 2 BUT to not even acknowledge her was odd. Dana was in college. She wanted to get away from her freaky family and moved east.   Believe it or not, I have the book "Poltergeist 2" and that is how they explain her absence.   Poltergeist 3, in some ways was better than part 2. I thought the score and the effects were a bit better.   I liked the connection the movie made to "Carrie". Nancy Allen, who plays Carol Anne's aunt had played mean Chris Hargensen in "Carrie". And in one part of the movie Tom Skerritt chastised Nancy for allowing that "pompous ass shrink making people think that Carol Anne was like Carrie or Houdini".   The character known as Scott apparently never made it back from the other side - an apparent goof up in the script. Anybody ever notice that?

Edited July 1, 2011 by circumstantial tree

[invisible airwave]

Beverly Hills Cop III was a disaster. It was actually on a pay per view station for free for some strange reason during a whole week when I was in 8th grade. It's bad enough they didn't bring Taggart back but the whole amusement park setting and plot is ludicrous.

[circumstantial tree]

I had a realization about a sequel many of you have forgotten (or perhaps never heard of because of how really bad it is), but possibly THE WORST sequel is "King Kong Lives" from 1986 which starred Linda Hamilton.

 

I remember I watched half of it and didn't finish it. It is the sequel to the 1976 version with Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange. From what I remember King Kong is revived after his fall from the World Trade Center and researchers find a female equivalent in size. Not sure how it ended.

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (invisible airwave @ Jul 1 2011, 12:23 PM)

Beverly Hills Cop III was a disaster. It was actually on a pay per view station for free for some strange reason during a whole week when I was in 8th grade. It's bad enough they didn't bring Taggart back but the whole amusement park setting and plot is ludicrous.

I just watched this move last week. I was too lazy to pick up the remote! Anyway, I agree, it's an awful movie. There was not one worthwhile moment in the entire movie. None.

[circumstantial tree]

Back to the Future parts 2 or 3?

 

I didn't like the first one, but I know it was popular. Just wonder how the sequels hold up to it.

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 2 2011, 11:32 AM)

Back to the Future parts 2 or 3? I didn't like the first one, but I know it was popular. Just wonder how the sequels hold up to it.

 

What can you possible not like about Back to the Future? I think it's as perfect as a movie can be - great screenplay, great casting, great directing. The perfect movie going experience, in my opinion.

 

The sequels are a few steps down. They are worthwhile because they manage to maintain the spirit and diversion of Back to the Future.

 

Wow. You don't like Back to the Future. Wow.

[circumstantial tree]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jul 2 2011, 04:07 PM)

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 2 2011, 11:32 AM) Back to the Future parts 2 or 3? I didn't like the first one, but I know it was popular. Just wonder how the sequels hold up to it.   What can you possible not like about Back to the Future? I think it's as perfect as a movie can be - great screenplay, great casting, great directing. The perfect movie going experience, in my opinion.   The sequels are a few steps down. They are worthwhile because they manage to maintain the spirit and diversion of Back to the Future.   Wow. You don't like Back to the Future. Wow. Michael J. Fox never impressed me.

[Your_Lion]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jul 2 2011, 09:07 PM)

What can you possible not like about Back to the Future? I think it's as perfect as a movie can be - great screenplay, great casting, great directing. The perfect movie going experience, in my opinion.

Certainly one of my favourite movies

[Presto-digitation]

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 2 2011, 08:43 AM)

I had a realization about a sequel many of you have forgotten (or perhaps never heard of because of how really bad it is), but possibly THE WORST sequel is "King Kong Lives" from 1986 which starred Linda Hamilton. I remember I watched half of it and didn't finish it. It is the sequel to the 1976 version with Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange. From what I remember King Kong is revived after his fall from the World Trade Center and researchers find a female equivalent in size. Not sure how it ended.

I saw this in the theaters....and walked out. Agree with you, it's terrible. Yeah, they save his life with a HUGEEEEE plastic Jarvick 7 artificial heart. This makes the Grodin/Bridges/Lange Kong remake look Oscar worthy, the sequel is so terrible.

[Ancient Ways]

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 3 2011, 09:43 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jul 2 2011, 04:07 PM) QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 2 2011, 11:32 AM) Back to the Future parts 2 or 3? I didn't like the first one, but I know it was popular. Just wonder how the sequels hold up to it.   What can you possible not like about Back to the Future? I think it's as perfect as a movie can be - great screenplay, great casting, great directing. The perfect movie going experience, in my opinion.   The sequels are a few steps down. They are worthwhile because they manage to maintain the spirit and diversion of Back to the Future.   Wow. You don't like Back to the Future. Wow. Michael J. Fox never impressed me. google the parts filmed by Eric Stoltz before they put Michael J Fox on the movie and you might change your mind.

[invisible airwave]

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 2 2011, 10:32 AM)

I didn't like the first one,

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lj3pjeY1611qgctzz.gif

 

Sorry, but it's one of those movie like Stand By Me or Wayne's World that I can't understand ANYBODY hating. That's like the 80s equivalent of Wizard of Oz.

Edited July 3, 2011 by invisible airwave