Forums → Popular Media → Movies: Originals .vs. Sequels

well..... i think series' beat all. like starwar, lord of the rings, harry potter movies arnt that bad, toy story, all some of my favorites.

but the first movies are usually better. but sequels arent always bad. there good alot of the time

Unfortunately originals are usually best, Sequels are supposed to take he success of the original and build on it, but usually this is over done and causes the movie more failure than intended.

i think if you make it a series you get the msot money cause then more people are looking foward to the next one and the producers make mroe money

i disagree. i feel like they shouldnt have even made an iron man 2 to begin with.

they should have skipped it and went straight for the avengers film a year after iron man 2 came out. now THAT movie would have made more bank then anyone can imagine

Generally originals are better than sequels but there are many exceptions.

I usually prefer the originals. Usually when the original is great, you watch the sequel too, regardless of how bad it is.

Originals. The Sequel can be okay sometimes.

originals are better because there the one that make you want to watch the seqaul. except ironman #2 was complety sick! i give it 20/10

Originals are always the best and then if the plot can go a little further than its a sequel.
Then if you need money like Disney you'll make a remake of a movie that was perfectly fine.

Depends on the movie I guess but usually original is better.

Generally originals are better, my opinion is that whatever made the original so good is usually lost when attempting to exploit it in the sequel.

The originals gives the whole series its flavor. So... Originals.

The Original because the Sequel sometimes leaves out some scenes or other important things and replaces them with new stuff, so I like the original would be better.

Original. But sometimes the sequel are good too.

the bourne was good, each movie kept on getting better