The WORST movie sequels, IYO
 

Just as IMO = In My Opinion, you can figure out what IYO means.

Here's my list.

Escape From LA
Mortal Kombat: Anhilation
TMNT 3
Robocop 3
Star Trek V
The Crow: Salivation...er, Salvation

I'll let you know if I think of more.

The Phantom Menace.
Every Police Academt movie after 2.

Like I've always said, I'm the only person in the known universe who shows the third Ninja Turtles movie any love! :lol:

"Mud wrestling is definitely a spectator sport!" - Donatello, from "Ninja Turtles III"

if prequels count, The Phantom Menace :sick: The only thing good about that movie was Darth Maul.

Batman and Robin :dead:

The star wars prequals, TMNT 3, and the last 2 batman movies.....

Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome

That one sucked too.

Ha! Forgot that one.

As far as the SW prequels go, I can understand not liking TPM, but that doesn't automatically mean AOTC is bad. I actually liked it. I'll not get into my reasons however, so I'll stop at that and stay on topic.

AOTC, was FAR better then TPM, but it still wasn't that great.

Funny fact:

I'm watching Escape From LA right now...

same here,on HBO

"Kappa? Cappuccino? Nah, it makes me hyper!" :lol: -Michelangelo

I'm with you NTCF, TMNT III was a cool sequel. At least the fight scenes were enjoyable. Plus, they used weapons, unlike TMNT II.

Anyway, worst sequels:

I guess Batman & Robin. :dead:

Heh, my girlfriend and I loved both Escape From N.Y. and Escape From L.A.

Anyways...

Batman Forever
Batman and Robin
Superman IV: The Quest For Peace
The Crow: City of Angels
Scream 2
Jason Takes Manhattan
Nightmare on Elm Street 4


And they're ALL worse than TMNT III, no matter what anyone says. They each have some fatal flaw which puts them way below TMNT 3's comparatively minor failings.

Batman Forever - Jim Carrey as the Riddler (for political reasons as well as his unfrgiveable overacting)
Batman and Robin - Nipples and codpiece... EVERYONE's piss-poor acting...
Superman IV - Almost 50% stock footage, visible wires during flying scenes... Margeux Hemingway in outer space
The Crow: City of Angels - The main character's annoying and distracting French accent, boring plot, bad lines ("You're going to die now"... no sh*t, Sherlock...)
Scream 2 - The fact that it was made, but Neve Campbell was still hot as always... the killer sucked
Jason Takes Manhattan - The whole thing... Jason's magical teleportation powers...
Nightmare 4 - The whole thing, again


See? TMNT 3 wasn't THAT bad, just mediocre.

Geez, why so much hate on Star Wars? I'm a life-long fan and I say Attack of the Clones was the best of all 5.

Batman and Robin is indeed the worst sequel, worst movie, and possible even worst thing ever in the entire universe. Mostly because it's a movie about Batman, and Batman is awesome, but that movie is not.

I heard a theroy tha the best movie sequels always have a kid with some kind of special knowlege or power. Aliens, Terminator 2, Temple of Doom, and The Mummy Returns are examples. Wonder if that's a formula or a coincidence.

Sayonara.

worst sequels-
robocop 2
predator 2
and ALL Disney cartoon sequels suck

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...MPH/215551.jpg
I have to disagree with you dude...
Nobody could have been a better Riddler than Jim Carrey, the PROBLEM was they descided to give the Riddler waaaaaaaaay to many costumes until it got rediculous... he should have kept the regular one instead of that crazy :sick: stuff.

He was trying to portray Frank Gorshin from the old liveaction series, and i honestly think he did a d@mn good job.
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...MPH/242137.jpg
personality-wise not appearance btw

Don't forget John Connor in T2, his "power" being that he's destined to save mankind... 8)

Perhaps the greatest insult in Batman and Robin is that Alicia Silverstone didn't get nipples on HER Bat-costume. That's prejudice any way you look at it.

And I agree with Ninjatron on the Star Wars haterizing. Last year, every board I went to had at least one thread about Attack of the Clones (I wasn't hangin' out here yet), and almost 7 or 8 out of every 10 posts not only said it was a great flick, but that it was the best Star Wars flick after Empire. Fast forward to today and nearly everyone deems it unwatchable.

I like it, AND TPM. In fact, AotC made TPM retroactively better because it took care of some lingering plot threads from Episode I. Episode III should do the same thing. Plus it will have Wookies! :D

Naw I don't think Carrey acted too much Like Frank Gorshin. Gorshin was way more goofier.

I'm a die hard SW fan(more so than TMNT) And the prequals are just a dissapointment to me. They could have been so much better.

Attack of The Clones sucked because there weren't enough Jar Jar Binks scenes.

tell me about it, i was thinking the same thing!

all though i am eagerly waiting the release of Ep III in 2005... thats gonna be amazing! Chewbaccas gonna be there. and also James Earl Jones is workin on it so you know were gonna hear more unforgettable darth vader dialoge we all know :D :D
not to even mention that there is a rumor that Hugh Jackman(Wolverine-XMen) is going to be in the film!!! :o
oops i did mention it.

:lol: :lol:
Jar-Jar RULES
he dosnt get the credit he deserves!

I don't see how bad Star Wars episode 1 is. The presqueals of Star Wars make the original ones look like their the sequals. OK so it may contain Jar Jar Binks in it. But I like all of them.

Anyway Sequals may do more terrible than the first movies. Let's say for exsample that Jaws 2 was worst than Jaws 1. Even if I never did seen the 2nd one.

Here's a Series that had alot of Sequals and the first one beaten the rest.
HALLOWEEN. My Dad & Uncle went to see it when it was new. And they had no clue what it was about. My Dad said that the sequal of Halloween are just bad. I couldn't agree more. If people don't care for a Sequal than why bother to make one and only make little money out of it.

No, he was trying to portray Ace Ventura in spandex, just like almost every character he plays except Truman.

I'll admit, I've never been a huge Jim Carrey fan, but he was the absolute worst part of that movie. His performance was way too over the top, so bad that it rubbed off on the normally phenominal Tommy Lee Jones.

A little Batman Forever History Lesson, explaining how that movie crashed and burned long before it even saw the light of day...

1994 or so, plans are in place for "Batman 3". Michael Keaton signs on for the role of Batman after some tension between him and Warner Brothers regarding the plot and how much screen time Batman himself would have. Tim Burton passes on the project and is replaced with Joel Schumacher, vocally a huge fan of the old 1960s Batman television show. Some say the project was doomed right there.

Tommy Lee Jones is cast as Two-Face, as Warner Brothers figures no-one will notice (or care) that Harvey Dent changed from the very black Billy Dee Williams to the very white Tommy Lee Jones. WB court Robin Williams to play The Riddler. After a long period of negotiations, Williams drops out of the role, citing the fact that the character is a relatively minor one in the script, playing clear second-fiddle to Two-Face.

After script changes put Batman even further into the background of his own movie, Keaton gets fed up. Unable to quit, he purposely asks for somewhere in the area of $20 million to do the role, and gets fired. he is replaced with Val Kilmer, and again, some say the movie died right there.

Chris O'Donnell is cast as Robin. Nobody forsees how the usually adequate actor will portray Dick Grayson as a whiny, unlikeable crybaby.

Jim Carrey's popularity is at an all-time high. WB rushes to sign him to portray The Riddler. Carrey demands script rewrites and an extraordinary sum of money, rumored to be in the area of $20 million... the amount of money WB refused to pay Michael Keaton. WB gives in, the script is rewritten, and "Batman Forever" becomes "The Jim Carrey Show", with The Riddler clearly getting the most screen time out of everyone.

Then of course, we know the rest. The movie was released, it sucked, but Jim Carrey got paid so everyone was happy. So if I ever mention how Jim Carrey almost single-handedly ruined Batman Forever, now you know why. Because WB was more concerned with stroking his ego (among other things) than making a good movie. And for that, he can stick that Riddler cane where the sun don't shine.

ok dude i can tell you really have a problem with that movie for some reason :roll:

I also think you are bein' alil prejudice against Carrey cuz of his popularity..
the man is one of the most talented comedic-actors in the world

Carrey, you da bomb in Dumb and Dumber, yo!!! :lol:

I have been impressed with some of his performances... Ace Ventura 1, Truman Show... Hell, even Earth Girls Are Easy...

But I don't think he's very funny. He's a very limited comedic actor. Goofy faces and funny noises only go so far with me. He's good at what he does... but what he does isn't much. Period.

carrey knew that nobody could a better Riddler. period.

yup, same here

Almost anyone could have. Even he could have, if he took the role even halfway seriously.

He, and Joel Schumacher, and everyone involved in the abortion that was "Batman and Robin" (which took all of "Forever"s flaws and magnified them tenfold) needed to understand that Batman is not funny. Even the Riddler character isn't a complete goof in the comics. Given a decent writer, he can be an intelligent, cunning villain. If Carrey had toned down his act in that movie (and lost the stupid red wig... what was *that* about?), he would have turned in a much better performance.

But no... Schumacher thought blacklights and corny jokes would somehow make a better movie. Guess we know how *that* turned out. Though at the rate Batman 5 is going (Ashton Kutcher as Batman), that could be the worst one yet.

:lol: ashton kutcher as batman............ :lol:

ashton kuther:"im batman"

Fez:"and im robin"

right there my eyes would explode

I sh*t you not. I've even mentioned it before. Warner Brothers has publicly stated that they want f*cking Kelso to play the Caped Crusader. The director is very much against it. So that means that soon enough, the movie will be without a director because WB always gets what they want.

Though thankfully they've apparently woken up on the Scarecrow issue, and now it looks like Christopher Lloyd is the leading choice for that character.

:lol:

Glad *you* think it's funny. Meanwhile, I find myself hoping that Kelso gets bitten by a monkey and catches the deadly Motaba virus so that he's unable to do the movie.

christopher lloyd now huh?
first it's marilyn manson, then its jeff goldblum... d@mn, why do they always do that?

Well, at least they're trying to cast actors now. Far as I know, Manson's acting experience is limited to getting a BJ from Rose McGowan in some movie she did.

Personally, I hope this movie (AND Superman) go through a million and one cast changes before they're finally released, because last I heard Orlando Bloom (that's right, the swishy guy with the bow from LotR) was now the leading choice to play Superman.

Kelso as Batman. Legolas as Superman.

Is Warner Bros. run by a committee of 14-year old girls? No, seriously.

you talkin bout the superman vs batman project?
i heard
Bruce Wayne/Batman-Colin Farrel (Bullseye in Daredevil)
and
Superman/Kal-El/Clark Kent-Josh Hartnett (Hollywood Homicide, 40 days 40 nights)

I think those are better choices actually....

No, I'm talking about the next Superman movie. Last I heard, Superman vs. Batman has been put on indefinite hiatus until both Superman and Batman are re-established in their own movies. Josh Hartnett officially passed on Superman some time ago.

As would my gut. :lol:

I think Kelso and Fez as Batman and Robin would be even closer to "The Ambiguously Gay Duo" than Clooney and O'Donnell's version...