Underrated Sequels/Prequels — Page 3

I like BTTF3 as much as BTTF (which is a tremendous lot).

BTTF2, on the other hand ... let's just say if someone were to make an Overrated Sequels/Prequels thread, this would be one I'd mention.

^see this is what I was saying BTTF2 is under-rated. All I hear on the subject is what Duracell is saying up there above the Stargate quote.

Alright, I could go into a little more detail on why I don't like BTTF2 all that much ...

Whereas BTTF & BTTF3 are distinct movies with their own distinct stories and styles, BTTF2 is just a parasite that piggybacks off of BTTF in order to exist; it has no distinct story of its own -- it's basically just a rehash of the original movie shown from another POV -- and beyond serving as a bridge between the two other movies, it serves no real purpose.

I heard the original idea of BTTF2 was for Marty to end up travelling into 1967, and frankly, I wish they had gone that route; it would have been more interesting and new ground would have actually been covered.

Not liking a film isn't the same thing as being over or under rated.

I do like BTT2. I like my sequels to have more complex and darker story-lines and character development *coughESB*

But in my experience the majority view is like yours BatteryBoy.

So I see it as being under-rated. It's not perfect. I would have had the third film return to the 'Fish Under the Sea' dance and have a third Marty avoiding the second and first and the plot getting even more convoluted and bizarre.

The ground to cover in a time travel story is the effects of time travel not the just seeing another time.

That's what period movies are for.

The joy of the first film is we see Marty see the past as really was after seeing it through the tales told by his disappointed parents.

The second film is about the consequences of letting time travel get into the wrong hands.

The third film should have dealt with the brain knotting bizarreness of unraveling tangled paradoxes.

Lucky for me I have discovered Rick and Morty which is essentially what I would of liked the series to have been more like but with added belching.

I think generally the BTTF sequels have the reputation they deserve: as enjoyable follow ups to an infinitely better film.

If either is underrated it is certainly 2, as I've heard many say it is easily the worst, even though it's probably on par or better than 3.

Someone should fill that hole in your head :p

I think The Godfather Part 3 isn't anywhere near as bad as it's made out to be.

It's actually worth watching.

I thought 2010 was pretty good.  It wasn't the same type of movie as 2001 but taken on it's own it was pretty good.

While I'm not going to say Highlander 2 is underrated (either version), I will say Michael Ironside's performance is.

I don't think I met anyone who didn't like Last Crusade until I started hanging out on nerd forums.  I can't agree that it is underrated.  I enjoy it, but so do lots of other people.

Tobar said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Ghostbusters: I enjoy 2 as much as 1. I hope a 3rd is made with Rick Moranis (partially) filling the hole left by Harold Ramis.

 Alternatively, you could watch THIS! ;)

 The only thing worse than watching Ghostbusters 2 is spending 70 minutes watching someone playing a video game.

ATMachine said:

Conversely, I think that Indy fans tend to massively overrate Temple of Doom, which I find a poorly paced and quite frankly racist movie, with a completely unlikeable leading lady who was only hired because of Steven Spielberg's boner.

I think TOD is more ethnocentric than actually racist. 

Oh Return to Oz is a pretty good movie in it's own right but a lot of people seem to hate it for some reason.

The criticism that Temple Of Doom is racist is so ridiculous and just another cheap shot people like to take at it.

Doom Trooper said:

The criticism that Temple Of Doom is racist is so ridiculous and just another cheap shot people like to take at it.

 I agree. George Lucas is anything but racist. I think what could most easily be found offensive was the dinner scene with snake surprise, etc., but it was clearly meant to show the unsavory nature of the folks at Pankot Palace in a humorous way. I used to manage apartments in Tucson several years ago and we had several Indian tenants with whom we had a good relationship. I remember them laughing at the absurdity of the movie, completely without offense. I doubt anyone has had their view of Indian culture shaped by the film.

And I find it amazing that anyone could accuse Last Crusade of racism. Utterly ridiculous.

Btw it's a good thing I read through this post for clicking submit. Don't know how I mistyped it, but folks might have been wondering what I meant when they read "anus duty" instead of "absurdity". Darn autocorrect!

I read that the dinner scene in TOD was supposed to indicate that the people living in Pankot palace were heretics -- mainstream Hindus wouldn't eat monkeys, for instance -- and there was a scene filmed where Jones addressed this, but for some unwise reason the scene was cut from the final film.