# What's your worst scifi sequel of all time?



## pete_scifi (Apr 24, 2009)

It has to be Highlander 2 doesn't it? Ironside is awful... in a truly brilliant way though.

It is awful, but it's a guilty pleasure.


----------



## Rodders (Apr 24, 2009)

My god, there's so many. Where can you start. 

Matrix 2 and 3? They were no where near as strong as the original. A bit pretentious too. 

How about Alien Resurrection? Great start, but lost it big time towards the end. 

The worst sequel though has to be Starship troopers 2.


----------



## Urien (Apr 24, 2009)

The Phantom Menace.

The Godfather 5: The Mafia in Spaaaace.
Alien 7: Clones, Clown and Blood.
ET: The Revenge.
Jaws 5: A Shark in the gene pool.


AVS


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2009)

Starship Troopers 3.....yes 3, I had to force myself to finish it.


----------



## nj1 (Apr 25, 2009)

pete_scifi said:


> It has to be Highlander 2 doesn't it? Ironside is awful... in a truly brilliant way though.
> 
> It is awful, but it's a guilty pleasure.


 

Highlander is one of my top films ever, can't stand the sequels, while my missus, (crazy as she is) thinks 2 + 3 are better than the first????


----------



## nj1 (Apr 25, 2009)

Ross said:


> Starship Troopers 3.....yes 3, I had to force myself to finish it.


 
I am amazed that they made a Starship Troopers2 let alone 3!!


----------



## kythe (Apr 25, 2009)

Rodders said:


> My god, there's so many. Where can you start.
> 
> Matrix 2 and 3? They were no where near as strong as the original. A bit pretentious too.


 
I actually liked the Matrix sequels. I agree that they don't live up to the quality of the first, but this doesn't make them the worst ever made. I think people's expectations were very high since the Matrix was so ground-breaking in many ways. The sequels had good concepts, but weren't as well put together.

I'll go with the Star Wars prequels as the worst follow-up movies. They completely ruined the series for me, and I especially resent how Lucas actually adapted the original trilogy to try to fit the new one.


----------



## AE35Unit (Apr 25, 2009)

kythe said:


> I'll go with the Star Wars prequels as the worst follow-up movies. They completely ruined the series for me, and I especially resent how Lucas actually adapted the original trilogy to try to fit the new one.



Na they're brilliant. I think he did an amazing job of seamlessly. blending them in. 
As for a bad sequel there can't be much worse than Fortress 2. Absolutely dire.


----------



## Grimward (Apr 25, 2009)

A bit dated, but the 2nd _*Conan*_ movie was far worse than the first (which admittedly wasn't great, but watchable).  I know they were going for physical effect, but Wilt Chamberlain as a sidekick?  I ask you.....

_*Starship Troopers*_ #1 was nothing to write home to mum about, either; not far to fall there, I'm thinking (although I'm also amazed there was a 3!).

None of the _*Jaws*_ sequels lived up to the stark suspense of the first.


----------



## steve12553 (Apr 26, 2009)

So many Science Fiction films are based on concepts that rapidly lose their wonder in a sequel. *The Matrix* had a wonderful ending and it should have remained an ending. The back story from *Star Wars* was just fine as a mysterious back story. We didn't need parts one through three. They were very weak and we already knew what was going to happen. There are so many possibilities for worse that it really boils down to personal taste (or lack  thereof). There are some that work. *Star Trek* was about a continueing mission to seek out... et. al. There are others that are designed to continue but we really don't need to know a whole lot about what happened to someone after their " Adventure of a Lifetime".


----------



## Rodders (Apr 26, 2009)

You say Star Trek, but remember that not all of the films were thatgood. Only a couple really stood out.


----------



## Tillane (Apr 26, 2009)

Couldn't agree more.  For my money, Nemesis and Insurrection would be up there with the worst, sharing space with Matrix Revolutions and (though it's more fantasy than sci-fi) Superman IV.


----------



## TheMoirae (May 1, 2009)

Alien 3 was horrible. Men in Black 2 was nowhere as good as the first.


----------



## Duchessprozac (May 1, 2009)

I racked my brains to think of a sequel that hasn't been mentioned when it struck me.

Thinking of Starship Troopers, I remembered another movie this guy did many years ago. Robocop.

Now I'm sure you're aware of the two commercial sequals, neither of which compare to the first (and the 3rd deserves to be here on its own.) After all, after the 1st movie had been a hit with the kids, the studio execs decided to tone the violence and language down until it had been entirely diluted enough for them to make a crappy tv series.

Then they decided to make several movies which I presume are spin off from said series, and whilst I have not seen these movies ( There's no way I'm watching such dross.) These movies could usually be found bundled together with 47 other Z-grade movies several years ago in those dodgy 'buy a £100 dvd player and get 50 free movies' deals, as well as at the very bottom of bargain bins around the world.

Based on the mentioned facts, I submit these small handful of Robocop movies as contender for worst sci-fi sequel ever.


----------



## BookStop (May 2, 2009)

There are so many horrible sequels, it's too difficlut to narrow down to only 1 'worst' film. Star Wars prequels are the biggest disappoinment, though, so I guess that might put thme slightly ahead of the rest.

Mimic 2
Starships Troopers 2 and 3
Jurassic Park 2 and 3
MAtrix 2 and 3
*Star Wars 1,2,3*
Alien 3 and beyond
Star Trek movies except 2 and 6
Back 2 the Future 2 and 3
Ghostbusters 2
Cocoon 2
HOney I blew up the Kid
REsident Evil 2,3
Butterfly Effect 2
Spiderman 2 and 3
Bill and Ted 2


----------



## Rodders (May 2, 2009)

Although these are in a thread call "Worst Sci-Fi Sequels" there's actually quite a few that i enjoyed. Guilty pleasures so to speak.


----------



## The Procrastinator (May 2, 2009)

True. I didn't mind Star Trek Insurrection actually, somehow it gave a measure of satisfaction. Which was then sucked into the black hole of Star Trek Nemesis, which is the only TNG sequel I have actively disliked and wish I had never seen.

I also like the Alien sequels, including Resurrection. My least favourite is the third one. (None of them are as good as Alien, but I still like them.)

I did not enjoy either of the Matrix sequels.

I wish the Star Wars prequels had never been made. It has already been mentioned how you know what is going to happen, but I think the worst thing about these movies is the stupidity, manipulation and character mangling (if you can call them characters) that has to take place in order to ensure that what we know is going to happen does in fact happen.

I have a vague memory of seeing the a Highlander sequel or two and being very unimpressed. Skating on the thin edge of plausibility as the first one was, I seem to recall they went over the cliff.

An interesting thread would be "Best Sci Fi Sequels".... There are no shortage of howlers, but are there any greats?


----------



## Rodders (May 2, 2009)

Of the ones mentioned, i actually liked Robocop 2, Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey, The Resident Evils etc. Not great films in themselves, but enjoyable and I would watch them again. 

The Matrix sequels. Reloaded i have watched and sometimes enjoy it and sometimes not. The last one i would never watch again. Awful. 

Alien series. We knock Alien 3, but there were some interesting concepts in there. Alien Resurrection had a really good start (and Ron Perlman), but had a really poor second class ending. 

Terminator 3 gets slated quite often. But it wasn't a bad yarn. Lets be honest, once Cameron left, there was no way it could have been anything near as good as one and two. 

Speaking of which, do you think that the passion is missing from the poor sequels and follow ups? Is that what makes them not so good? I think if you have a look at all the good sequels, there always seems to be something of a personal stake in them. With the bad ones, it's just the studios trying to make money on the back of a good film. The Director doesn't seem to have any passion for the content and wouldn't necessarily pick up on the bits that make a film a poor sequel. 

What say you?


----------

