Why Sequels Are a Bad Idea

Check list for a crap sequel:
1. No returning actors from the original? Check.
2. No recurring supporting characters from the original? Check.
3. Central premise has hardly any relevance to the original's? Check.
4. The Number 2 is part of the title? Check.
5. Direct-to-video release? Check
6. Only reason for its production was greedy, chucklehead studio execs looking to cash in on a temporarily hot commodity? Check, check, check.
7. It's existence trivializes the value of the first? Eeeh, depends on how much value the first initially had. It was one of the first movies to discuss the potential applications and dangers of this brand new technology called "virtual reality" a decade plus before Wii became part of the Christmas must-have gift-list. And it was a future crappy 007's first big American role...

Quod erat demonstrandum, sequels almost always suck.

Why?

Okay, this had no relevance to the original at all, which upon re-viewings is definitely cheesy by today's standards. But I was 9 or 10 when Troll came out and I didn't sleep for a week. This one didn't have the same troll or even some of that toll's drinking buddies.

In fact, there isn't a single troll to be found. It's about a bunch of goblins -and while I'm not a creepycritterologist,I'm pretty sure goblins are on a totally different rung of the evolutionary ladder than trolls- who like to spend their time turning the residents of Nilbog into some low carb version of Soylent Green.

The friggin' dogs get chatty? And people actually auditioned for this, thinking it was a GOOD idea?






Why?

Ugh.

Granted, the first one never should have been made in the first place. But did it really leave so many unresolved plot points that a sequel was really deemed necessary for the sake of closure???

At least it had ONE actor from the original cast...
Re: Troll 2

Pretty sure the word 'bogus' covered it all.
Has anyone seen or heard from Alex Winter since this?

The demonic My Buddy doll knocks up Cabbage Patch Linda Blair?
See why sequels are hardly ever a good idea?

Wow. The bodies of evidence defending my argument that sequels almost always suck are piling up faster than I can find places to bury 'em. In this instance though, it's a faulty syllogism, because the theory that sequels suck implies that the original did not suck. And that's definitely not the case here...

I went to the theater with my cousin and his girlfriend, having never seen the first two films. Unsurprisingly, I wasn't at all lost since there was no deep, connective back story. I have since been forced to see the others, sequentially, and realized these are not as much sequels as they are merely rehashings of the same uninspired plot. Sure, the car chases and fights become more and more spectacular, but where's the character development? Where's the central story arc? Isn't the point of a franchise to build on what came before, so as to create a sense of mythos? Even mindless action blockbuster are allowed do that...look at the Lethal Weapon and Delta Force series. Okay...Delta Force was a joke.

Some movies should not be sullied by a half-@ssed sequel. Especially direct-to-video half-@ssed sequels.

Whether this was supposed to be a sequel or a revamp, or a hybridization of the two, it ended up just being crap. So much so that it makes me long for a late night viewing of Superman IV, replete with Jon Cryer's checkered MC Hammer pantaloons.

Yer kiddin', right?

Let's hear it for Jon Cryer's checkered MC Hammer pantaloons, the best part of the whole movie!!

If only Richard Pryor had his freebasing flambe incident AFTER making this piece of crap...he coulda justified catching on fire.

Oh, and yeah...the director's name was Richard Lester. I'll stop there and let you make the obvious joke yourself. It may be incredibly juvenile...but it never gets old.
C'mon, his name in shorthand is Dick Les.

Why oh why didn't they stop with Citizens on Patrol? End on a high note, y'know? Go out in style, not like Fat Elvis.

It all started going down hill here. Not the worst of what followed, post-Guttenberg...but not remotely worthy of the first four.

Let's see...why are sequels usually the devil's handy work?
Brought in a different actress to play the same character. Have we learned nothing from Bewitched and Roseanne?
Went straight to home video. Always a reason THAT happens.
Crap follow-up to a crap flick that never neccesitated a follow-up to start with. What is crap squared?

Why did I watch this in the first place? Oh yeah...my ex-wife was ga ga over the first and couldn't resist its charm when she saw this at the video store. Reason 458 she's my ex.

Never even saw this, but since Reese Witherspoon had the good sense to stear clear, I'm certain this further strengthens the validity of my theory.

Question.
Flixster recommended this for me because I liked Spider-Man 3?
How exaclty are these two even REMOTELY related?

While this has nothing to do with my argument over the evils of sequels, I'm adding it to the list on principal.
This will surely become the basis of a corollary I have yet to define.

IF only negative stars were an option...
The first corollary to the theory that sequels almost always suck is sequels to slasher flicks -ESPECIALLY to cult classics like the original Chainsaw Massacre- invariably suck.

Airplane II is to Airplane! as BOCA burger is to real, delicious, greasy, cheesburger.

Not nearly as bad as the onslaught of shit sequels that eventually followed. But since this was the grand marshall of that fecal float parade, it makes the list of crap sequels by proxy.

Slasher flick franchises make me sad.

Okay, if the number 2, or any reference to the number 2, is a part of the movie's title, it's a safe bet it never should have been made.
Just wait for the remake, er, I mean "re-imaging."

Anne of Green Gables? The Sequel?
Welcome to the list.
Let me introduce you to Teen Wolf Too, Airplane II- the Sequel and Lawnmower Man 2.
Y-you already know these losers? That's great! Have a fruit roll-up.

I know Troma never set out to make great cinema, but Toxie Part 3? High school A-V Club geeks could do better.

Thank heavens they made a sequel. I had soooooo many questions when the credits rolled on the first one.
Now I can sleep peacefully.

Hell yeah, what would a list devoted to the inherent wrongness of sequels be without an entry from Death Wish?
Have you ever tried to sit through one of these? Have you ever tried to have a Death Wish marathon?
Yeah, that's what I thought.

Crappy direct-to-video sequel with no one from the original cast of a crappy film based off a crappy TV show?
Hat trick!!
Twice!!!
This is my closing argument!!!!!
Quod erat goddamn demonstrandum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yippee!

Enjoyed the first one when I was a kid. Still enjoy it now and again. Never knew they made a follow-up. On prinicple, I bet it blows.

Road House is hardly a classic film, but it was good enough that it didn't deserve to be followed by this.
You have to admire the marketing strategy though: knowing no one would rent this of their own volition, throw two b-movie bimbos on the cover. it'll surely catch the eye of some over- or under-weight dude who can't get laid.

Suspension of disbelief is a funny thing...
I have no problem surrendering myself to the idea of a giant gorilla rampaging through the streets of NYC. Nor do I fail to accept that somewhere out there, there is another Kong hanging out, doing whatever it is Kongs do when they're not being pestered by stupid people who couldn't leave well enough alone.
But you really expect me to buy the notion that they had compatible blood types, enabling a successful transfusion? What are the chances of that??
C'mon.