TPM wins "worst sequel in cinema history" title.

"The reason I get so frustrated with some of the "nostalgia" arguments is that it sounds like the other person is saying that the new films are just as rubbish as the originals and that everyone was too stupid to realise how bad the OT was because we were all kids when we saw them."

Don't think about it that way, think about it this way. The OT were great movies for their times, that hasn't changed. It is people expectations and views of movies that have changed. So, while views of current movies have shifted the "nostalgia" factor still keeps views of older movies in a static state. Does that make sense?

That is why people continuously state things like, "movies/music/etc. were so much better years ago." When in reality if you look back at old movies/music objectively it just doesn't hold up. Sure, there are a lot of great ones but what percentage? I would wager that the number of movies that you could look back on and say, "boy, that's great" would be fairly consistant through the years.

Okay, that kind of went off into tangent territory but I think my point came across. If it didn't let me know.

 

The fact that won worst sequel is an absolute joke. First off are we excluding all those countless horror sequels etc. Not to mention the worst movie ever made Batman and Robin. I admit I like this films(Not on par with Aotc, ESB, Or A newhope but fun and a nice set up ) but even if you dislike this film, come on worse than Halloween 3 ?

 

That is why people continuously state things like, "movies/music/etc. were so much better years ago." When in reality if you look back at old movies/music objectively it just doesn't hold up. Sure, there are a lot of great ones but what percentage? I would wager that the number of movies that you could look back on and say, "boy, that's great" would be fairly consistant through the years.


True, but I honestly dont think anyone here is claiming that movies were better in "the old days", just that the prequels aren't very good.
I mean if I say that Jurrasic Park is better than Jurassic Park 3, it doesn't mean I'm saying that movies in the 90's were so much better than they are today, it just means that I think the original JP was so much better than its follow ups.

 

Bad dialogue, Jar jar and Jake Llyods unconvicing performance as a force prodigy is what diminished TPM for me.

"Theres always a bigger fish" ..

I remember turning to my buddy in the theatre and rolling my eyes after that one. It was at that point that I realized this movie was made more for my kids then me.

"Yippeeeeee" ..nuff said.

I know I know, these movies are supposed to be an homage to 1930's serials, but the dialogue comes off more like Ed Wood than Flash Gordon.


Jake was too wooden in his delivery, and he had no chemistry in his scenes with Portman .


Jar Jar ...

Lucas took a gamble that people would respond emotionally to a puppet in ESB and it paid off. Yoda is loved by all and most people actually prefer the puppet to the cgi version.

Lucas hoped lightning would strike twice with Jar Jar ..and it didn't.

Can't fault him for trying, but still.

 

So, do you think TPM is the "worst sequel in cinema history" or not?

Just trying to tie it in to the topic.

 

NO I personally like TPM even though it's not my favorite of the Saga.

 

What ? you didn't want to read line after line of me ranting on without a proper summation


No, I do not believe TPM was the worst sequel ever.

One of the most disappointing ? Yes.

A lot of the other movies people have listed were either Part 3 or 4 and so the bar wasn't set that high to begin with.

You had to expect superman 4 to be crap compared to the original, so hopefully your expectations would be adjusted. You'd walk out saying :"man that sucked" but it wouldnt ruin your day.

The same thing with the Highlander films. The original was a low budget niche sci fi film that struck a chord with people.

Sequels rarely exceed the original in terms of budget and creativity. Most times Its all about a quick buck. The key to sniffing out these types of movies is seeing how the original ends.

In Highlanders case, the story was pretty much over at the end of the first one. Any attempt to revisit the characters would be contrived, and every attempt by the producers to do so has been.

Superman 2 is a possible exception, 1/3 of the footage for it was shot for the first movie. They built a story around what they already had and took the story somewhere interesting. Again if you compare budgets between the two, the second episode was fairly modest . It was a big hit and ........

Then they ran out of ideas and basically ended up with the horror that is Supes III and Supes IV

Granted in GL's case I don't think it was about money, it was more about fiddling.

He had the tools in his garage (ILM) to do amazing things, he must have drove himself crazy for the last 20 years thinking "Oh man I could have done this with that effect..or done that with this software..."

There is a saying that great art is never finished, only abadoned. George is in a unique position to revisit his art over and over again, always with new tools and a thirsty audience ready to gobble it up sight unseen.

I just wish he had devoted as much energy towards storytelling as he does post production effects.

Obi Wan hides as a hermit on the same planet as Luke, dressed like a Jedi, a few miles from the very same home Darth Vaders mother lived and is buried at. They stash luke, whose name is unchanged, with the people who lived with Darth Vaders mom.

Lazy storytelling.

If I had to hide from someone I wouldnt hide two blocks from his house. Id move to another city.

 

Sequels rarely exceed the original in terms of budget and creativity.

Im with you on creativity but as far is budget is concernced i completely disagree, once a movie makes alot of money that the studio is willing to pump cash into it

 

once a movie makes alot of money that the studio is willing to pump cash into it

Good point. The second films in the Matrix and Austin Powers series are examples of that.

Now AOTC actually had a smaller budget than TPM I believe. I think it was because of all the lead time the design team had before TPM that just wasn't there before AOTC.

Doug Chiang and his people started working in early 1995, just a couple months after Lucas started on the screenplay. That gave them 4-plus years before the film's release to do all that design work. And of course there was only three years between the releases of TPM and AOTC.

 

Big mystery to me why Lucas didn't court the talents of Beverly Cleary or Judy Blume to write the screenplays for the PT. It would've been perfect talent for the target market. Lucas seems to have been paying homage to Cleary with "Anakin Skywalker, Age 8."

Judy Blume's script would have been more appropriate for the 'tweenage set: "Are you there Maker? It's me, Anakin Skywalker."

Either way, I'm sure it would have been a real step up.

 

don't know if this has been mentioned or if it can even be considered a sequel or a movie for that matter....but the scorpion king was the worst movie i have ever seen and should get the crown for worst sequel.....


....the cloner

 

I would classify The Scorpion King as a vehicle. Made for the sole purpose of promoting the "Rock" as a movie 'star".

The irony of those two words being in the same sentence is not lost on me.

I lump this movie into the "Didn't expect much" category and as long as they didn't have a dance number tossed in the middle act I knew what I was getting into when I paid matinee prices for a ticket.

 

the best part in TPM is the Duel of the Fates and during that we get to see the Gungan battle and Starfighter Battle and Amidala and it's cool!

 

Sequels come and go. Lucas has his vision of 'how it all started'. So I'll just leave that be. Sure TPM wasn't great, but how many times have you seen it? It couldn't have been that bad.

Did you walk out of the theater?
Did you fall asleep?
Did you throw things?

Ask yourself these things and then ask if it was the worst sequel of all time. I mean, come on. 'Batman and Robin' was awful. I would have walked out if I didn't fall asleep first.

My vote for worst movie (non-sequel) of all time goes to 'Dark City' and 'Battlefield Earth' in a tie.

It's funny how sci-fi movies have a lot of 'fallacies' in the genre.

Plus, there are so many puke-worthy horror sequels out there, that TPM shouldn't even be in the top 50.

It's all about build-up and expectations.

 

The worst sequel in recent times (except AOTC) is for me "The Matrix Reloaded". I laughed at the film, I almost fell asleep at the end, and when it was over I was happy I was done with it. Man, that was a bad film.

 

Who DARES insult the greatness that is Dark City? Eh -- it's definitely not a movie for everyone, I'll admit that.

Ree Yees - fair enough. But the true question is, are you going to set up shop at a Matrix message board?
(They'll loooooooove that, man. I still remember the half-hour I decided to spend cruising MatrixFans.net. Oh my.)
(Poster there who said "[The critic] is SUPPOSED to like Reloaded because it is a GOOD MOVIE", may your words live forever. )


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Well, no, I won't set up shop there, because I never cared for 'The Matrix' in the first place

 

It's a prequel, not a damn sequel!

 

ok i loathe the PT at times, but it has never crossed my mind as the worst sequal prequal ever. Have you ever seen highlander 3 and 4, they completely condritict the story line set up by the first two. Apparently conner survives as the last imortal and claims the prize in 1, has all the bizarness happen in 2, only to find out a few years after claiming the prize he has to defeat the mongolian in 3. How did he claim the prize if three imortals were still alive???? oh yeah then in 4 duncan kills conner to gain power to win the prize. Where was duncan in the first three movies? How did duncan win the prize when conner already won it?

TPM and AOTC arent as good a the OT in my OPINION, but they are far from the worst.

 

"Who DARES insult the greatness that is Dark City? Eh -- it's definitely not a movie for everyone, I'll admit that."

LOL!

 

In 10 years, whoever proclaimed TPM the worst sequel ever is going to look very stupid.

 

It's already been four years and no one really has had any qualms with making that declaration.

 

Well, I mean 10 years from NOW which will have been 14 years. Thats a lot longer than 4 years.

Anyway, mods, please dont consider my previous post a flame. I have never seen anyone on these boards go so far to proclaim TPM the worst sequel ever.

 

Who on these boards claimed this?

 

The worst sequel in recent times (except AOTC) is for me "The Matrix Reloaded". I laughed at the film, I almost fell asleep at the end, and when it was over I was happy I was done with it. Man, that was a bad film.

I agree completely. I really liked 'The Matrix', it was fun to watch, and the effects were great, something new after all these usually cgi-laden movies like 'Twister' or 'Independence Day'.
But 'Reloaded' was pure crap, I'd rather watch TPM, which is in no way the worst sequel in cinema history, there are dozens of sequels which are worse than Episode I.