PDA

View Full Version : Best Series for Sequels?


rhett
09-07-2008, 11:15 PM
We've had some long running series in the realm of horror, some stuck in DTV and some gloriously reinventing itself with each new episode. Overall, which long running series has the best sequels?

My apologies to those who wanted to vote for Leprechaun - there's only 20 spots.

Matt89
09-07-2008, 11:18 PM
Honestly...I'd have to say Friday the 13th.

You look at the Halloween series, and part 1 is a masterpiece, part 2 is decent, and then it just goes TOTALLY downhill from there. Friday the 13th is one series that started out just "decent". There wasn't such a sharp drop in quality like Halloween, NOES, TCM and Hellraiser. It stayed consistently mediocre lol. Plus, I like more of the Friday sequels than I do the Halloween sequels.

~Matt

Katatonia
09-07-2008, 11:31 PM
Hellraiser got snubbed. :mad:

I'll be damned if this isn't the toughest poll. I'd say Friday the 13th. The story is at its core so utterly basic, and yet still enjoyable sequel after sequel.

indiephantom
09-07-2008, 11:31 PM
Psycho. I've owned all the sequels in various formats. II is the best, but I enjoy them all.

Of course, I'm a huge fan of the Elm St., Halloween, and F13th sequels, but I think the Psycho ones are more overlooked.

Psycho II and III come out at the height of the slasher age, and I love the look and the feel of those pics.

rhett
09-07-2008, 11:33 PM
Hellraiser got snubbed. :mad:

I had it in the original list, but I must have overwritten it when I formatted. Gone is Puppet Master though, and Barker's baby is back on the list. :evil:

Matt89
09-07-2008, 11:51 PM
Psycho II and III come out at the height of the slasher age, and I love the look and the feel of those pics.

Part III came out just after the height, no? The height of the slasher age I'd say was like '80, '81, '82. Even Part II was '83. :confused:

~Matt

maybrick
09-08-2008, 12:09 AM
Despite my eternal love for Phantasm, I chose Hammer's Dracula mainly because it had more sequels.

rhett
09-08-2008, 12:11 AM
Part III came out just after the height, no? The height of the slasher age I'd say was like '80, '81, '82. Even Part II was '83. :confused:

~Matt
Eh, semantics. The genre thrived throughout 1980-1985. Elm Street was in 1984 and the seminal Friday flick, The Final Chapter, was also 1984.

onebyone
09-08-2008, 12:27 AM
I like the Evil Dead sequels the best by far, but the best run I would have to give to Friday the 13th. There are 1,454,555 sequels and only one I don't like. That's impressive.

Plus, the remake is going to be great I just know it.

Matt89
09-08-2008, 12:30 AM
LOL well I figured, and judging by the amout of reviews on Hysteria Lives, there's a massive amount of reviews for films from 1980, '81 and '82 and then 83/84 have about half of what 1980/81/82 have for their own respective years, but-LOL nah, I'm just trying to be an an ass. :D

~Matt

Mutilated Prey
09-08-2008, 12:32 AM
As much as I love Friday the 13th, I think the Halloween sequels were better done down the stretch - close though.

j tea
09-08-2008, 03:24 AM
Friday the 13th is one series that started out just "decent"... It stayed consistently mediocre lol.

I agreed with that logic. If it were only the 1st and 2nd movies of a series, I would go with Hellraiser. I think the atmosphere and sensibility is pervasive and unifying.

fceurich39
09-08-2008, 04:04 AM
friday the 13th mainly for the first 3 sequels that brought some closure but parts 5,6,7,8 were ridiculous but the storyline worked well now jason goes to hell and jason x were pointless sequels but were alright freddy vs jason worked well as nightmare part 8 but not the jason part

KR~!
09-08-2008, 04:04 AM
I went with Evil Dead since all three films kick ass in their own way. F13th has lot of crappy films in the series.

KamuiX
09-08-2008, 05:36 AM
As much as I love almost every other original film on this list more than I do the original Friday the 13th, the series has without question produced the most entertaining run of any of the sequels of the series above that I've seen.

old-boo-radley
09-08-2008, 05:40 AM
I went with Frankenstein because Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein and Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man are legendary classics and Ghost of Frankenstein and Son of Frankenstein are good movies. Not just entertaining, but actually good.

thrashard76
09-08-2008, 06:09 AM
Friday the 13th

dwatts
09-08-2008, 06:25 AM
I went with Hammer's Dracula.

Every series listed have flaws. The Universal Frankenstein's suffer as soon as Karloff is out of make-up, Friday the 13th simply doesn't develop, Halloween has to remake itself by the fourth film - and the third had nothing to do with the series, The Evil Dead turned into sub par Python, The Saw franchise takes six hours to tell a horribly cliched back story that it's impossible to care about a soap opera level of cursory drama, etc.

Hammer's Dracula kind of falls to pieces, but it's a series that is old enough now it's covered itself in some barnacles and dust, and the cracks are covered up with kitsch. So I went with that.

Dave
09-08-2008, 06:29 AM
For me it was either Friday or Howling (not). Friday sequels up to and including VII are enjoyable for me.

Erick H.
09-08-2008, 06:38 AM
What,no "other" option ?
I'd go with Hammer's FRANKENSTEIN series.They wisely followed the adventures of Peter Cushing's Baron rather than having to repeatedly revive the Monster and were creative enough to find some pretty involving variations on the theme rather than just esentially remaking the original film (as so many sequel series often do ). Also,unlike the Hammer DRACULA series Cushing wasn't short changed for screen time in later entries like Lee was (possibly because Cushing LOVED the part whereas Lee feared that he would be trapped in it).You saw less and less of Lee as the DRACULA's progressed but Cushing still had lots of screen time till the end.I think overall the FRANKENSTEIN's were stronger and more consistent.

MorallySound
09-08-2008, 06:51 AM
I gotta go with Romero's Dead films. The first 3 are all 5 start films, and Land and Diary, personally, are fun films and I enjoyed them.

fattyjoe37
09-08-2008, 07:38 AM
Easily Evil Dead, the only series listed where every entry was good. But, I guess it's easier to do that when there are only 3.

Mattapooh
09-08-2008, 11:08 AM
I like Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness quite a lot and find them better than the first one, so I went with those.

spawningblue
09-08-2008, 04:00 PM
I like Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness quite a lot and find them better than the first one, so I went with those.

Agreed, I love when Raimi added the humour to the trilogy, especially Army of Darkness! Made the films stand out from just another scary film. Don't understand all the hate behind it, I guess people just wanted to see more of the same and were startled by the change. The only franchise up there where every movie was good in my opinion.

Second would probably be the Friday films, but like Dave said, I think they fell apart after the 7th film (Hopefully the remake resurrects the franchise for the better!). Halloween, and Nightmare are close behind them, but again fell apart with each sequal.

dwatts
09-08-2008, 04:16 PM
I guess people just wanted to see more of the same and were startled by the change.

I don't think the only alternative to making them comedies is "more of the same". Surely there were many directions it could have gone in?

Army of Darkness is pure and simply not funny. Therefore, I didn't like it. Not funny, not horror, just dumb. And boring. That's why I personally didn't like it.

Still, they seem popular enough. I don't mind some humor with my horror, but when they do away with the horror completely and make a Python wannabe title, I'm drawing the line.

satans-sadists
09-08-2008, 05:50 PM
As much as I love the Universal Monsters, my vote goes to Hammer's Dracula series. Christopher Lee is my favorite actor to ever play Dracula, yet even a film without him such as Brides of Dracula is a classic in my eyes. Peter Cushing brought so much to the series despite only being in five of the films. The later sequel Taste the Blood of Dracula is a very well made atmospheric horror film.

I really love the Frankenstein series from Hammer too. This would probably rank a close second for me. Terence Fisher can't be praised enough for his superb direction of so many films from both series.

spawningblue
09-08-2008, 06:11 PM
I don't think the only alternative to making them comedies is "more of the same". Surely there were many directions it could have gone in?

Army of Darkness is pure and simply not funny. Therefore, I didn't like it. Not funny, not horror, just dumb. And boring. That's why I personally didn't like it.

Still, they seem popular enough. I don't mind some humor with my horror, but when they do away with the horror completely and make a Python wannabe title, I'm drawing the line.

Fair Enough. I personally loved it, and thought the humor worked well, especially all the quotable one liners. As for boring, it's one of the most re watchable movies to me. I love the adventure aspect of it, and the fact that it is a fish out of water story, as well about an idiot who has to save the planet. And there were quite a few horror aspects to it, scary, not even close, but there were zombies, skeletons, witches, ect. it's too bad you didn't get the same feeling watching it as I did.

And I agree, I'm sure they could have stayed on the horror route and came up with some creative way to make it work, and do a proper sequel. But at the same time, I do think it's awesome that they completely changed it's style, and still at least to some people, made it work as well, if not better. Not a hard feat to accomplish, as so many other movies have tried and failed in my opinion.

Workshed
09-08-2008, 08:15 PM
What, no love for Tremors?:lol:

Tough decisions. I love the Universal's Frankentein series for all its art and history, and I love the Friday films for all their laughs and ridiculousness. But, I've seen the ED series the most, and it gives me the most entertainment for my dollars. I'm an unabashed loved of Army of Darkness, and I think EDII is my fave of the series, and ED is a classic that I admire.

shithead
09-09-2008, 12:49 AM
Friday The 13th, i grew up on them and they're still good dumb fun.

indrid13
09-09-2008, 02:36 AM
Romero's Dead series. Followed by Universal's Frankenstein series.

Paff
09-09-2008, 04:50 AM
Haven't read any comments yet...I'll wait till after I post.

Chose Phantasm, only for the fact that it had the same director and (mostly) the same actors throughout the series. Sure, it's uneven in a lot of parts, but you really do get to know the characters.

Saw also kept a lot of personnel, but there's a definite "cashing in" vibe there. One movie a year for 5 years now. Phantasm took more than 9 years just between the first two, so it was a labor of love. Not an effort to cash in on the popularity.

Romero's Dead films are certainly tempting, especially since Dawn and Day are fantastic films. But the decrease in quality of the recent sequels takes a bit away.

Friday the 13th? After seeing the original theatrically back in June, I'm amazed at how BAD each subsequent film got. The first was a real horror movie, after a couple of sequels Jason actually became the HERO of that series!

Evil Dead is sure tempting, with three quality films (all with same director and same actor, a key element). But the inclusion of slapstick and intentional humor in the sequels certainly changes the tone. I like both the serious original and the humorous conclusion, but they feel a lot differently (not to mention that the second film is practically a remake of the original)

Paff
09-09-2008, 04:59 AM
What,no "other" option ?
I'd go with Hammer's FRANKENSTEIN series.They wisely followed the adventures of Peter Cushing's Baron rather than having to repeatedly revive the Monster and were creative enough to find some pretty involving variations on the theme rather than just esentially remaking the original film (as so many sequel series often do ).

You know, this is a really good call.

You pointed out one of my loves of the series - that it is NOT just a revive-the-monster outing every time. Frankenstein does different experiments with each film, which is quite logical.

My other love is that make no doubt, the villain in this series is Dr. Frankenstein. Which is the way it was always meant to be. When someone hear's "Frankenstein", the image that comes to mind is Boris Karloff as the monster. Peter Cushing and Hammer did it the way it always should have been done. And just how nasty is he in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed??

Erick H.
09-09-2008, 05:54 AM
You know, this is a really good call.

You pointed out one of my loves of the series - that it is NOT just a revive-the-monster outing every time. Frankenstein does different experiments with each film, which is quite logical.

My other love is that make no doubt, the villain in this series is Dr. Frankenstein. Which is the way it was always meant to be. When someone hear's "Frankenstein", the image that comes to mind is Boris Karloff as the monster. Peter Cushing and Hammer did it the way it always should have been done. And just how nasty is he in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed??

Cushing is at his best in FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED.I had the pleasure of seeing that film at the American Film Institute's Silver Theater on Halloween of 2006 (along with THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN and REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN) and the audience loved it.Cushing is so clever and sleek that you kind of like him,but then he'll do something that is totally heartless and you remember just how twisted his character has become.Cushing brought great dimension to the role,great actor.

Anaestheus
09-09-2008, 06:31 AM
Oddly enough, the two series that I first thought of aren't on this list: Hammer's Frankenstein (the first five Fisher films just increase in excellence) and Aliens.

Judging each series as a whole, I went with Evil Dead. Even though it is one of the shortest series here, the quality of the series on a whole is 100%. While I'd probably rather watch Romero's first three Dead movies, the last two have been huge disappointments.

spawningblue
09-09-2008, 03:32 PM
Cushing is at his best in FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED.I had the pleasure of seeing that film at the American Film Institute's Silver Theater on Halloween of 2006 (along with THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN and REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN) and the audience loved it.Cushing is so clever and sleek that you kind of like him,but then he'll do something that is totally heartless and you remember just how twisted his character has become.Cushing brought great dimension to the role,great actor.

You know, this is a really good call.

You pointed out one of my loves of the series - that it is NOT just a revive-the-monster outing every time. Frankenstein does different experiments with each film, which is quite logical.

My other love is that make no doubt, the villain in this series is Dr. Frankenstein. Which is the way it was always meant to be. When someone hear's "Frankenstein", the image that comes to mind is Boris Karloff as the monster. Peter Cushing and Hammer did it the way it always should have been done. And just how nasty is he in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed??

I haven't really seen any of the Hammer horror films. I have been wanting to, but heard there have been problems with the Universal box set, as the discs are double sided, and I had problems with the Munsters box set before because of that Anyone else have problems with these? I am now using a PS3 to play movies, so maybe now they will play better?

It looks like to have the complete monster series I would need the Hammer Horror Collection (Warner), Hammer Horror Series (Universal), and Icons of Horror: Hammer Films (Sony), Dracula: Prince of Darkness/ The Satanic Rites (Anchor Bay), Revenge of Frankenstein (Sony), Frankenstein Created Woman/The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires (Anchor Bay), Horror of Frankenstein (Anchor Bay), Frankenstein and the Monster From Hell (Paramount), Scars of Dracula (Anchor Bay), Dracula A.D. (Warner Bros.), The Mummy's Shroud/The Plague of Zombies (Anchor bay), Blood From the Mummy's Tomb (Anchor Bay).

Would that be all the Hammer monster movies, and the best versions in Region 1? Are they all worth owning? It sucks that so many companies own them, as I guess that stops there from being a complete box set collection.

And sorry, this should be in the Hammer forum! Maybe I will repost it over there.

spawningblue
09-09-2008, 04:17 PM
I re-posted this in a hammer forum, so instead of taking up space in here, if you want to reply or give me your opinions, reply in the other forum, thanks!

Anthropophagus
09-09-2008, 05:10 PM
Went with Psycho.
In many aspects, Psycho II is just as good as the original imo.

Johnny Macabre
09-12-2008, 03:51 AM
A lot of good choices. I have to go with Hammer's Dracula. Mainly because the four first sequels are not just good, but great! Dracula Prince Of Darkness is one of the finest Dracula film and Brides Of Dracula is too often forgotten by fans! Amd even if Dracula Has Risen From The Grave and Taste the Blood Of Dracula don't bring anything new, their gorgeous to look at!!

Matt89
09-12-2008, 05:28 AM
I don't think the only alternative to making them comedies is "more of the same". Surely there were many directions it could have gone in?

Army of Darkness is pure and simply not funny. Therefore, I didn't like it. Not funny, not horror, just dumb. And boring. That's why I personally didn't like it.

Couldn't agree more. Always hated Army of Darkness...I don't know why they went in THAT direction. The first one was actually really scary in places, then you watch Evil Dead II and......eugh. Such a waste of time.

~Matt

Matt89
09-12-2008, 05:31 AM
In many aspects, Psycho II is just as good as the original imo.

:eek: Wow...really? LOL

~Matt

Livingdead102
09-13-2008, 04:00 PM
I went with Frankenstein because Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein and Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man are legendary classics and Ghost of Frankenstein and Son of Frankenstein are good movies. Not just entertaining, but actually good.

Ditto.

DVD-fanatic-9
09-16-2008, 09:11 PM
I haven't seen many of the black and white horror films. I also find that their quality is hard to determine. Many / most of them feel the same.

As for the 1970's and up, I go with Psycho as the series having the best sequels. If you don't count the remake. They were all at least better than average films of their type. If you're smart enough to look at them as having their own identities apart from the Hitchcock's original, you'll understand why they're so good. Part II is an amazing slasher film and literally one of the only truly classy slasher movies that doesn't feel the need to rely on cheap nudity. It only implies it. Part III on the other hand, while incredibly sleazy, is also really dark, well-paced, well-stylized, and very scary. It has a few problems in relation to the character of Norman Bates and seems to be making jokes at his expense, but if that's true, at least they're freaking funny jokes (that "stop laughing at me!" scene is wonderful). Part IV doesn't get enough credit. If nothing else made this movie work, HELLO- Olivia Hussey and CCH Pounder are incredible actresses and, along with another very strong performance by Anthony Perkins, make almost all of this movie work expertly. Just because a lot of really immature pee-ons like to attack anything Mick Garris directs does not automatically make this a bad movie. This is an outstanding sequel (until the ending) and considering it's also a made-for-TV movie makes it all the more impressive.

After that, I think Scream and Friday the 13th (for the exact reasons Matt89 mentioned) are the only truly great franchises. The Scream sequels suffer a little from trying to continue the theme they thought people loved the original for ("their love of 'scary movies' " then became "their love of sequels" then became "their love of trilogies" - and that was a weak decision, that's not what the first film was about) and Randy's stupid movie rants (in the original movie, they had a point, in the sequels they just did it because they were responding to the studio mentality of: "the audience loves the character" like we're not supposed to find him irritating but in the first movie we were supposed to be irritated by him and find him a loser, the sequels tried to make him a "lovable" loser and you could feel that was an unnecessary concession the movie didn't need to make), and the tone of the movies shifted away from slasher-horror and more toward detective thriller and buddy comedy. However, the acting remained strong, and everything the filmmakers tried as a theme in the movies basically paid off.

Mok
09-18-2008, 06:16 PM
I went Halloween. I thought about it like this: Which series had the most consistantly solid follow-ups instead of the one or two strangest. Halloween / Hallowen 2 / Halloween 3 / Halloween 4 are all pretty damn good. Whereas Friday 1 & 2 stand out in that series as do Elm Street 1 & 2. I would put Romero's Dead series second for the same reasons and Hammer's Frankenstein series a close third.

Bobbywoodhogan
09-18-2008, 09:51 PM
Friday the 13th, I love most of the sequels and the ones Im not as keen on, I still like bits of.

allmessedup
09-18-2008, 10:17 PM
Dead series, just because it generally seems more of a consistent story as the films progress. I didn't like DIARY at all, but for me that's only one genuine stinker out of five, which is a pretty good batting average. So many people like at least one of the later films better than the original film--I'm not one of these people, but I think this series is one of the few where there's a large group of fans who actually like at least one of the later films better than the first installment. Even with the last two films, that's still a pretty strong sign of quality.

baggio
09-19-2008, 02:45 PM
So many good ones there to choose. But I chose Phantasm. I picked that one because each sequel really felt like a continuation of the prior movie. The whole series feels like one long movie. Same characters, same director... Very comfortable with the people on screen.

Rockmjd
09-19-2008, 03:11 PM
I chose Friday the 13th. Even the shitfests that are Part 8 and Jason X have interesting enough kills to make me enjoy watching.

Chunkblower
09-25-2008, 03:27 AM
I voted for the SAW series. While most horror franchises have their redheaded stepchildren and continuity cluster fucks, the SAW films are remarkably consistent in tone and production value. Say what you will about the soap operaness of each new plot revelation, there is a genuine effort at mythos building while still trying to give audiences more of what they liked about the first film. It doesn’t always work (Saw III was dire), but the series is certainly all of a piece. The Scream films would’ve been able to claim the same thing if they hadn’t totally botched the third one.

Some thoughts on some of the more notable series listed:

The Nightmare series has produced more bona fide masterpieces than any of the others on the list (1, 3 and 7), but there was a consistent downward slide after Dream Warriors until Craven rescued the series with New Nightmare. Still, this is one series where every installment offers at least some passable entertainment value, although my judgment of Freddy’s Dead is colored by my nostalgia for having seen in the theatre with the 3-d climax. Sorry, but when you’re 12 that’s the most awesome thing ever.

My nostalgia extends to almost all of the Halloween sequels, despite their wildly varying quality. Has their ever been a series with a much fucked up chronology? As much as I disliked the decision to remake it Halloween, it was really the most sensible thing to do. There are so many loose ends and abandoned plot lines in the sequels that you almost need to provide a primer for people not steeped in the lore of the series. With the exception of the first three, you can watch the Halloween movies in almost any order and not really miss anything.

Romero’s Dead films hold up pretty well, too, and although Day and Land certainly aren’t in the same league as Night or Dawn, they’re much closer than most sequels ever come. Diary, however, completely killed it.

I actually thought that Child’s Play 2 was better than the first, but the inherent silliness of the concept caught up with the filmmakers by the third film. The series had already slid into unintentional comedy (and no, I’m not talking about Chucky’s one-liners) when they decided to go for intentional comedy with Bride. Too little, too late. This series is beyond salvation.

Psycho. That’s a tough one. I love Psycho II with a genuine, unironic passion. It’s certainly not as good a film as the original but if push comes to shove, I’d rather watch II any day of the week (my Psycho II dvd is autographed by Meg Tilly and sits in a display case). III never really comes together as a cohesive whole, although there are individual scenes that skirt on the edges of brilliance. Perkins is a bit too “off-the chain” in this one, and after the ending of II there’s little to no suspense. IV is one of the best made-for-cable films I’ve ever seen. It looks as slick and polished as any theatrical release of its time might’ve. The problem is that it makes the mistake of wanting to fill in gaps that don’t need to be filled in. It’s extremely entertaining for what it is, but there’s no real arc in the narrative and at the end we’re pretty much right back where we started.

As far as I’m concerned there are only 3 Hellraiser films and although the third feels incongruous with the first two, they’re all pretty great.

maskull
09-27-2008, 04:05 PM
I had to vote for Friday The 13th as I enjoy pretty much every installment, except for Jason Goes To Hell.

I came really close to voting for Wolfman though. Just really awesome movies to watch late at night.

Vlachio
10-02-2008, 03:42 AM
Friday the 13th pretty solid IMO!

Kim Bruun
10-05-2008, 07:01 PM
I went with Halloween. Halloween II is a spectacular horror film in my book, and Halloween 4 and 5 are quite good as well. Even H20 is decent.

Friday the 13th has a few good sequels as well, mainly the three first ones, but the rest of the franchise has little appeal to me.