Underrated Sequels

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
My main thoughts as I read every word were 'why don't you make a Terminator future war movie? minus a power balad in the end credits why don't you make a Terminator future war movie? minus a power balad in the end credits why don't you make a Terminator future war movie? minus a power balad in the end credits why don't you make a Terminator future war movie? minus a power balad in the end credits'

tLkvzMc.png
 
Poltergeist II is another I find underrated. I actually prefer it to the first. I like the original but I thought the second one was more entertaining, plus Reverend Kane is one of the scariest villains in the history of anything
 
The Lost World: Jurassic Park.

Loved the film, i think the T-Rex in San Diego at the end killed the films chances of being seen as a good sequel.
 
I always thought the San Diego rampage was a fun sequence and I enjoyed it for the change of scenery, too.
 
I always thought the San Diego rampage was a fun sequence and I enjoyed it for the change of scenery, too.

Agreed, it's my favorite part. T-Rex in the city was awesome, love the yell! ;)
Lost World is a great flick and much better than part 3...

Predator 2, Superman 2, Batman Returns, and Die Hard 2 are also great IMO.
 
Superman II actually is a pretty well-liked movie from what I've seen, never seen anybody talk bad about it.
 
I actually never knew The Lost World was so hated by people until some years ago.

When it came out it was one of those movies that kids went crazy for. I think everyone at my school was obsessing over it. I never really searched anything online for it, so I didn't know the hate that movie had.
I know the movie has cheesy moments, I know it is not perfect (And i Hate Julianne Moore with all my heart) I also know that the girl beating the Raptor was pretty stupid
but I still like The Lost World a lot.
 
No. It's the majority. But it has a terrible sequel that followed it, so people don't look down at it as much.

Why do you think people are now warming up to Temple of Doom? Because they realized, compared to Crystal Skull it's a ****ing masterpiece.
 
I'm surprised no one mentioned Hannibal. Hannibal is a great sequel it's biggest problem is that it is a sequel to one of the greatest movies of our time so it's bound to disappoint. Also the book has mixed reviews, I for one wish they went with the book ending as it was more bold, it also suffered from Starlings recasting with Julianne Moore, while it's not my favourite roll of Julie's and her Starling was different than fosters iconic portrayal, but I really enjoyed her in this movie. She's such a talent it's hard not to accept her... I'll admit though I'm a bit biased because I've worked with her a few times in the past including just the other day and I was reminded of what a talented, funny, personable down to earth and genuinely sweet person she is. I really can't say enough great things about Julie as a person and a professional.

Both Gary Oldman and Ray Liotta are memorable and underrated in their performances, Mason verger was always a character I was utterly fascinated with.

And Hopkins was great as always, I must admit I can't get enough of his Hannibal he did so much with so little screen time in Silence that I just wanted more and it's never overkill... It's why even though I felt red dragon was a strange move, and I like man hunter and cox, I accepted red dragon for the joy of seeing Hopkins reprise his role once again.

Yes sir in a hannibal fan, I think it was a well done film just a jagged pill to swallow for most folks.
 
I'll admit though I'm a bit biased because I've worked with her a few times in the past including just the other day and I was reminded of what a talented, funny, personable down to earth and genuinely sweet person she is. I really can't say enough great things about Julie as a person and a professional.

Que?...................
 
Julianne Moore ruins it for me.

I understand that not casting Foster was a bad way to kick off this sequel in people minds. She was so much Clarice and the dynamic between her and Hopkins was magic, but I think Julie gets a really bad wrap when it may not be justified. Like I said its not my favorite role of her's but most people shot her Starling down on principal. She was solid in the roll IMO as she is in most of her efforts.
 
Ray Liotta
being fed his own brain.
is awesome.

Red Dragon was pretty good too. Prolly Ratner's best.
 
I understand that not casting Foster was a bad way to kick off this sequel in people minds. She was so much Clarice and the dynamic between her and Hopkins was magic, but I think Julie gets a really bad wrap when it may not be justified. Like I said its not my favorite role of her's but most people shot her Starling down on principal. She was solid in the roll IMO as she is in most of her efforts.

It wasn't that Foster got replaced, it was that Julianne was the one that replaced her.
She was not the best choice for that role.
 
It wasn't that Foster got replaced, it was that Julianne was the one that replaced her.
She was not the best choice for that role.

Just out of curiosity who would you have cast instead? I might have cast Cate Blanchette myself, but I think there are few better chameleon actresses than Julie. Blanchette is one of them and can pull off a Foster look closer than Julie can, but IMO the list of believable candidates as a replacement is pretty thin, Julianne Moore makes sense to me.
 
Back
Top