I just saw an advanced screening of Spiderman 2....it was good, but not as good as the first one....

That statement seems to have a logic error.

Assuming negative numbers indicate bad:

s2 > 0
s2 < s1

But

s1 = 0

has (in anyone's opinion) any sequel been better than the original?

to avoid confusion, let's leave star wars out of this.

I thought Aliens was better than Alien. I just found the first one boring compared to the second. Then it went downhill after.

Of course I saw Aliens before I saw Alien so maybe that had something to do with it too.

With the exception of Ms Dunst, I thought the whole of the 1st film was pretty lame.

As for sequels, T2 was at least as good as the first one.

This is a great topic, and the list is indeed quite small.

The Godfather Part II is considered by many to be better than the first one, and though the first one comes out ahead at IMDB, I'd put 'em about even. Part III is universally hated, although I still think it's a good film.

A lot of peopole think The Last Crusade was better than Raiders of The Lost Ark, I tend to disagree there, but that one comes pretty close to the original. Temple of Doom was kind of a letdown.

I personally liked Lethal Weapon 2 and even 3 better than the first, but I can see why most people disagree there.

I think that Rocky II comes really close, and if it weren't for the third, fourth, fifth, and seventy-third volumes, conventional wisdom might agree with me.

Along the comic book lines, Superman 2 was definitely better than the first.

Then there's Evil Dead II...

s2 > 0
s2 < s1

But

s1 = 0

the post was probably changed so excuse me if so... but i don't see s1=0 in that statement. s1 > s2 > 0, i believe.

s1 = 0

is my postulate.

I thought Aliens was easily the worst of the first three Aliens movies. Resurrection was so bad as to be nearly unmentionable. But I'd put even money on Alien vs. Predator to be as bad.

I'll have to admit that I'm a big Ridley Scott fan and a big David Fincher fan (though I didn't realize it at the time), while I mostly hate James Cameron, so....

Many of the James Bond films after Dr. No are better than Dr. No. Thunderball and Goldfinger come to mind. Many are worse, too. Moonraker positively leaps to mind.

Oh, and some of the Star Trek movies were better than the first. II:TWoK definitely was.

I'd have to say that Scary Movie 3 was better than the first two.

I peronally liked The Last Crusade better than Raiders, but ToD was horrendous.

Star Trek definitely follows the even numbers are better rule. (One exception, IV Sucked. Bad.)

I thought Terminator 2 was much better than Terminator.

Other than that.....

I agree with a lot of this list (though Star Trek IV was awesome, and the even number rule broke down later on while in the TNG movies)

Um, I thought Fellowship was the weakest of the LOTR movies, but I am not sure that really counts. Also Army of Darkness was the best of that series, though I am not sure that counts either.

So, to get at least one in that should count fair and square, let me mention Road Warrior.

Other than Joe Morton, I think T2 was kinda lousy. The original Terminator was much more innovative and original, Harlan Ellison notwithstanding.

Oh, and some of the Star Trek movies were better than the first.

Yeah, but the first didn't exactly set the bar very high, did it? TWoK is (IMO) the best of the ST movies.

has (in anyone's opinion) any sequel been better than the original?


Mad Max was OK for a low budget film

Mad Max Road Warrior was much better.

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome was quite a good movie, by far the best of the three.

tanstaafl.

This may not count much (I was having to stretch my mind to think of sequel movies, as most have already been discussed), but I would say that X2 was better than X-Men. Like I said...it's a stretch.

Shrek 2 ?

Yeah, but the first didn't exactly set the bar very high, did it?

No kidding. It was by FAR the worst of the bunch. My wife just got me the entire set on DVD this past Christmas so I've been going back and watching them all. After watching the first one, I can't believe they were funded to do more.

Shrek 2 ?

I think so. Also Toy Story 2 was better than the first.

I think that Return of The King was the best of the LOTR movies, but I don't think it counts because it's not really a sequel.

Oh, and the latest Harry Potter movie was much better than the last two, IMHO. However, in general the source material seems to be following the same trend (the third book is my favorite so far).

but I would say that X2 was better than X-Men. Like I said...it's a stretch.

Well, I don't know about better, but it certainly held to the same level of quality, which is rare.

[Star Trek: TMP] was by FAR the worst of the bunch.

I can't agree with that. It certainly didn't feel like Star Trek, and it certainly wasn't very good, but several of the ones made after it are putrid -- only vague approximations of movies. I'd say that the last ST was the worst by far, but I think that any number were at least as bad as TMP.

Yeah, Star Trek 1 wasn't great, but 5 and a couple of the TNG ones just blow.

And I saw the new Harry Potter today, and have to say that it is better then the first two. And better than the book in a lot of ways too, which is another thing that is very rare.

5 was bad, but at least you can laugh at it. Sitting through a half hour of bad special effects with no apparent purpose is just torture. Just my opinion though. I thought it was pretty much a common feeling that the first movie was the worst. I stand corrected on that point at least.

Well, I certainly don't think that TMP's special effects were bad. I think they were pretty damn good, especially considering it was 1979 or so. And, honestly, I wasn't sure at the beginning of your post if you were referring to TMP or Nemesis.

The first Star Trek film was actually my favourite, but it's altogether possible that this is mainly because I was about eight at the time, easily awed by special effects and uncritical of lumpen acting. After reading what everyone else has to say about it, I guess I must never watch it again as an adult...

Peter

I think they were pretty damn good, especially considering[ it was 1979 or so.

Maybe, but my main complaint about the movie isn't the quality of the special effects but rather their over-usage. Do we really need to watch fifteen minutes of the inital approach to the Enterprise? I think that wen you make a movie with special effects, you have to have more substance for the movie to grow old gracefully; you can't just rely on cool pictures. TMP doesn't, and in fact is glaring about it. But there's no accounting for taste!

And, honestly, I wasn't sure at the beginning of your post if you were referring to TMP or Nemesis.

lol.

Yep agree with the harry potter first one sucked second one much darker and more intresting

Sorry guys but I just had to post this. I ran into it searching for media and just couldn't stop laughing. Chances are it's been seen here before so i apologize if it has.