• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Nominations: Which movie sequel was the most disappointing?

Lorendiac

Civilian
Joined
Apr 30, 2004
Messages
586
Reaction score
0
Points
11
You may nominate three different movies at this stage.

Which ones caused you the most disappointment when you sat down to watch them for the very first time?

The basic rule is: Each thing you nominate has to be at least #2 in a series. Or any higher number. For instance, Highlander 2 would qualify as a candidate, but so would Batman and Robin, which was the fourth in a series!

Right now I'm just asking for "nominations." If I get enough feedback to suggest that people are actually interested in this subject, I'll later put together a Poll that will list a bunch of the most popular nominees and then invite everybody to vote for just one as being the Biggest Disappointment on the ballot! :)

No limits on genre: You are free to nominate a sequel from a superhero series, fantasy series, science fiction series, cop series, comedy series, horror series, whatever! I'm not fussy! Likewise, it can be animated or live-action, and it can be a "straight to video" production instead of something that was released on the big screen in thousands of locations.

However, there has to have been at least one previous movie. The first movie to be based on an old TV series doesn't count. (Example: Charlie's Angels is not a valid candidate, but its sequel, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle would be an acceptable nominee.)
 
Wow, that's a lot of rules for a fairly self explanatory thread. Anyway my nomination goes for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, just doesn't fit well with the other two, no Nazis, Indy wasn't after a Christain artifact, didn't hint at his day job, he pretty much literally fell out of the sky into the plot, had an annoying kid sidekick and the girl was really annoying.
 
Are these rules deliberately redundant?
 
Speed 2, Speed 2, and....Speed 2.
 
Lorendiac said:
You may nominate three different movies at this stage.

Which ones caused you the most disappointment when you sat down to watch them for the very first time?

The basic rule is: Each thing you nominate has to be at least #2 in a series. Or any higher number. For instance, Highlander 2 would qualify as a candidate, but so would Batman and Robin, which was the fourth in a series!

Right now I'm just asking for "nominations." If I get enough feedback to suggest that people are actually interested in this subject, I'll later put together a Poll that will list a bunch of the most popular nominees and then invite everybody to vote for just one as being the Biggest Disappointment on the ballot! :)

No limits on genre: You are free to nominate a sequel from a superhero series, fantasy series, science fiction series, cop series, comedy series, horror series, whatever! I'm not fussy! Likewise, it can be animated or live-action, and it can be a "straight to video" production instead of something that was released on the big screen in thousands of locations.

However, there has to have been at least one previous movie. The first movie to be based on an old TV series doesn't count. (Example: Charlie's Angels is not a valid candidate, but its sequel, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle would be an acceptable nominee.)
You're so bossy. :(
 
KenK said:
Are these rules deliberately redundant?

Not exactly what I was aiming for, but painful experience has taught me not to take anything for granted. If I just said, "What were the three movie sequels that were the most disappointing?" then I just know someone would say, "Dukes of Hazzard, Charlie's Angels, and Starsky and Hutch."

If I then said in a reply, "No, I meant a sequel to another movie, not just a sequel to audiovisual entertainment in the format of a TV show," they would say, "Then why didn't you say so in the first place?"
 
Lorendiac said:
Not exactly what I was aiming for, but painful experience has taught me not to take anything for granted. If I just said, "What were the three movie sequels that were the most disappointing?" then I just know someone would say, "Dukes of Hazzard, Charlie's Angels, and Starsky and Hutch."

If I then said in a reply, "No, I meant a sequel to another movie, not just a sequel to audiovisual entertainment in the format of a TV show," they would say, "Then why didn't you say so in the first place?"


It's a sad day if people are that stupid.
 
amazingfantasy15 said:
Wow, that's a lot of rules for a fairly self explanatory thread. Anyway my nomination goes for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, just doesn't fit well with the other two, no Nazis, Indy wasn't after a Christain artifact, didn't hint at his day job, he pretty much literally fell out of the sky into the plot, had an annoying kid sidekick and the girl was really annoying.

are you kidding me? there are oodles of terrible sequels to great movies out there and you choose Temple of Doom? yeah, it was different than the other two, but that was a good thing. Last Crusade, as cool as it was, felt like a rehash of Raiders.
 
KenK said:
It's a sad day if people are that stupid.

There are people who call customer support lines to ask for help in making something print out on their computer. Sometimes the key problem is that they don't have the printer turned on. Or plugged in. Or loaded with paper.

So, yes, it's a sad day, every day, but I guess we all have to learn to live with it. :eek:
 
amazingfantasy15 said:
Anyway my nomination goes for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, just doesn't fit well with the other two, no Nazis,

So? Indy is not Winston Churchill.

amazingfantasy15 said:
Indy wasn't after a Christain artifact

So?

amazingfantasy15 said:
didn't hint at his day job

So?

I don't see how any of these are relevent to the quality of the film.

If you said, "It's badly written" or "it's Spielberg's laziest movie" or "it's just a rollercoaster ride of stunts and nastiness with very little plot" then you'd have a case.
 
Attack of the Clones was a huge letdown. I thought The Phantom Menace was weak, but surely that was just because Lucas was getting warmed up and surely Episode II would take out the trash? Sadly it's the worst of the series and I recall sitting in the cinema convincing myself not to walk out.
 
The crow 2, not a bad movie but not even close to the greatness of the first.
 
Kevin Roegele said:
Attack of the Clones was a huge letdown. I thought The Phantom Menace was weak, but surely that was just because Lucas was getting warmed up and surely Episode II would take out the trash? Sadly it's the worst of the series and I recall sitting in the cinema convincing myself not to walk out.

Menace was worse for me.
 
superman returns, I smell a stinker i just saw the trailer with MI:3 Routh is in no way in hell superman, the cast for this film sucked arse!!!
 
GoldenAgeHero said:
superman returns, I smell a stinker i just saw the trailer with MI:3 Routh is in no way in hell superman, the cast for this film sucked arse!!!

You can be so f-ing dumb some times...
 
GoldenAgeHero said:
superman returns, I smell a stinker i just saw the trailer with MI:3 Routh is in no way in hell superman, the cast for this film sucked arse!!!

ri-f***in-diculous...
 
Superman 4.



And I agree with GAH, I think SR is goin' to be crud. :o
 
It only takes one to ruin a good thread, and a whole bunch of people like myself to put the final nail in the coffin :D

Anyway I say Robocop 2 was pretty disappointing, Robocop 3 was not due to the suckitude of 2. I mean the problem with Robocop 2 is that it so superficial. The reason people loved Robocop 1 was because it was fresh and different, and it hit so many levels especially with satire. Robocop 2 basically took Robocop 1 and just remade it with more violent, more over the top characters, and the same point, it simply just came out not that great. But there are some memorable parts to it such as the Robocop 2 process, Cain, and the mayor subplot.
 
Movies205 said:
It only takes one to ruin a good thread, and a whole bunch of people like myself to put the final nail in the coffin :D
You're an expert at that :)

Coffee.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,712
Messages
21,790,833
Members
45,617
Latest member
BadlyDrawnKano
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"