Best sequel

[Osprey]

Aliens ramps up the spectacle, but it's actually a very mediocre movie.

I respect him, but honestly James Cameron movies are usually kind of dumb.

I think that Aliens is an intelligent movie, more so than Alien. Alien is a great movie that I love, but it's not exactly a smart one. The whole plot is characters making dumb decisions (like bringing an aggressive alien on board and always splitting up) and getting punished for it by unceremoniously dying one by one, slasher style. It doesn't really have any concrete themes, meaning or message. There's really no character development to be found. It's great mainly because it has an awesome premise and is highly effective as a horror.

Aliens also has an awesome premise and is highly effective, just as an action movie instead of as a horror. It does a lot that Alien doesn't do, though. It gives Ripley character development and a slight romantic arc. It introduces themes of motherhood, grief (in the uncut Special Edition), corporate greed, masculinity, femininity and militarism. It's an allegory for the Vietnam War. It's actually a pretty intelligent film, IMO, especially for an action movie. It's perhaps easy to see that it cranked up the action and assume that that makes it dumb, but it added a lot more than just that.

As for James Cameron, his last few movies are kind of dumb, I agree, but his early career hits (The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2) were all pretty intelligent.

 

[RandV]

Obviously it's D2: The Mighty Ducks. What's wrong with you people?

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I think that Aliens is an intelligent movie, more so than Alien. Alien is a great movie that I love, but it's not exactly a smart one. The whole plot is characters making dumb decisions (like bringing an aggressive alien on board and always splitting up) and getting punished for it by unceremoniously dying one by one, slasher style. It doesn't really have any concrete themes, meaning or message. There's really no character development to be found. It's great mainly because it has an awesome premise and is highly effective as a horror.

Aliens also has an awesome premise and is highly effective, just as an action movie instead of as a horror. It does a lot that Alien doesn't do, though. It gives Ripley character development and a slight romantic arc. It introduces themes of motherhood, grief (in the uncut Special Edition), corporate greed, masculinity, femininity and militarism. It's an allegory for the Vietnam War. It's actually a pretty intelligent film, IMO, especially for an action movie. It's perhaps easy to see that it cranked up the action and assume that that makes it dumb, but it added a lot more than just that.

As for James Cameron, his last few movies are kind of dumb, I agree, but his early career hits (The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2) were all pretty intelligent.

Oh damn... I'll admit I liked Aliens a lot more than I thought I would on my last rewatch, but it's still nothing close to the original - especially on the "smart" scale.

For what it's worth, here's my take on all of them:

Surprisingly not that long considering how much material I cover.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I think that Aliens is an intelligent movie, more so than Alien. Alien is a great movie that I love, but it's not exactly a smart one. The whole plot is characters making dumb decisions (like bringing an aggressive alien on board and always splitting up) and getting punished for it by unceremoniously dying one by one, slasher style. It doesn't really have any concrete themes, meaning or message. There's really no character development to be found. It's great mainly because it has an awesome premise and is highly effective as a horror.

Aliens also has an awesome premise and is highly effective, just as an action movie instead of as a horror. It does a lot that Alien doesn't do, though. It gives Ripley character development and a slight romantic arc. It introduces themes of motherhood, grief (in the uncut Special Edition), corporate greed, masculinity, femininity and militarism. It's an allegory for the Vietnam War. It's actually a pretty intelligent film, IMO, especially for an action movie. It's perhaps easy to see that it cranked up the action and assume that that makes it dumb, but it added a lot more than just that.

As for James Cameron, his last few movies are kind of dumb, I agree, but his early career hits (The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2) were all pretty intelligent.

No themes in Alien at all...well except for an alien that looks like female genitalia forcibly implanting its seed into a man then having that seed violently force itself out of them, and the most intelligent person and one to ultimately survive through said intelligence is a woman. But nope, no themes hidden there.

And major plot point you got wrong. The alien was brought onto the ship by Ash, the android the company planted into the crew to ensure above all else that a viable specimen of the alien was delivered to them, hence why he over ruled Ripley's decision to not let them on. It wasnt just a dumb character doing a dumb thing for plot's sake

 

[syz]

Aliens/T2 are the same conversation to me tbh. Both started as smaller budget, more atmospheric horror/suspense stories that ended up going way more mainstream/Hollywood with their sequels, and then both fell off of a cliff after.

 

[Osprey]

Oh damn... I'll admit I liked Aliens a lot more than I thought I would on my last rewatch, but it's still nothing close to the original - especially on the "smart" scale.

For what it's worth, here's my take on all of them:

Surprisingly not that long considering how much material I cover.

Thanks. Respectfully, though, I think that you may've overanalyzed Alien. It doesn't seem to be a film about gender. From Wikipedia: "Shusett and he had intentionally written all the roles generically; they made a note in the script that explicitly states, 'The crew is unisex and all parts are interchangeable for men or women.'" Also, H.R. Giger designed the alien on his own after the script was written. If it appears sexual, that doesn't mean that the film was intended to have a sexual theme. It's also a matter of interpretation because you interpreted it as resembling male genitalia and BigBadBruins7708 interpreted it just now as representing female genitalia.

No themes in Alien at all...well except for an alien that looks like female genitalia forcibly implanting its seed into a man then having that seed violently force itself out of them, and the most intelligent person and one to ultimately survive through said intelligence is a woman. But nope, no themes hidden there.

And major plot point you got wrong. The alien was brought onto the ship by Ash, the android the company planted into the crew to ensure above all else that a viable specimen of the alien was delivered to them, hence why he over ruled Ripley's decision to not let them on. It wasnt just a dumb character doing a dumb thing for plot's sake

The alien looking erotic to you and the only survivor being a woman (a common trope in the horror genre) aren't themes and necessarily deliberate. Point taken on the plot point, though. The film does seem to say something about the employee value and expendability.

 

[Hivemind]

Mad Max 2

Fury Road > Mad Max 2

 

[PANARIN BREAD FAN]

silent night deadly night part 2
rambo first blood part 2
the enforcer
deathwish 2

 

[I am not exposed]

Fury Road > Mad Max 2

Lol. Hell no.

Mad Max 2 > Max Mad 1 > Mad Max Fury Road > Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome is the correct order.

 

[TheAngryHank]

What is the best sequel ever made?

Road warrior and its not close

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Thanks. Respectfully, though, I think that you may've overanalyzed Alien. It doesn't seem to be a film about gender. From Wikipedia: "Shusett and he had intentionally written all the roles generically; they made a note in the script that explicitly states, 'The crew is unisex and all parts are interchangeable for men or women.'" Also, H.R. Giger designed the alien on his own after the script was written. If it appears sexual, that doesn't mean that the film was intended to have a sexual theme. It's also a matter of interpretation because you interpreted it as resembling male genitalia and BigBadBruins7708 interpreted it just now as representing female genitalia.

The alien looking erotic to you and the only survivor being a woman (a common trope in the horror genre) aren't themes and necessarily deliberate. Point taken on the plot point, though. The film does seem to say something about the employee value and expendability.

@BigBadBruins7708 was obviously talking about the face-hugger (and if you go back to my comment about Prometheus, i noted its: "first clear inclusion of the vagina dentata in the series (the facehuggers were leaning this way)"). He could have referred to the eggs too, which are laying in a spaceship shaped as two legs with an opening at their junction.

I, on the other hand, was talking about the creature:

Which is clearly a cock - you can see it rise, just after Ripley's been walking around in her panties, just at the beginning here:



Yeah, some people didn't get what Scott and O'Bannon were doing (the screenplay is admittedly inspired by Shivers, there's things that are pretty obvious). Kubrick layers his films with meaning too, without making it public knowledge in his staff. The film is widely known in film studies as a gender piece, I wasn't making shit up.

Also, watch how the supermale-creature (the megacock) disposes of its victims: it toys with the females, and it goes through the males from the weakest one to the more virile ones, because yeah, its cock is bigger than theirs.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

@BigBadBruins7708 was obviously talking about the face-hugger (and if you go back to my comment about Prometheus, i noted its: "first clear inclusion of the vagina dentata in the series (the facehuggers were leaning this way)"). He could have referred to the eggs too, which are laying in a spaceship shaped as two legs with an opening at their junction.

I, on the other hand, was talking about the creature:

View attachment 745052

Which is clearly a cock - you can see it rise, just after Ripley's been walking around in her panties, just at the beginning here:



Yeah, some people didn't get what Scott and O'Bannon were doing (the screenplay is admittedly inspired by Shivers, there's things that are pretty obvious). Kubrick layers his films with meaning too, without making it public knowledge in his staff. The film is widely known in film studies as a gender piece, I wasn't making shit up.

Also, watch how the supermale-creature (the megacock) disposes of its victims: it toys with the females, and it goes through the males from the weakest one to the more virile ones, because yeah, its cock is bigger than theirs.

Yeah, I was referencing the face huggers more for the "flip the script and have a female genitalia force copulation on men" being driven home. But to your point even the ship and eggs fit the theme

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

"flip the script and have a female genitalia force copulation on men"

Yes! What I meant by "surrogate mothers": "central notion of male anxiety: mother running the nostromo (“our man”) with no care for its well-being, the fear of reproduction, the androgynous women characters and the feminisation of the male characters (making them the surrogate mothers),"

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Yes! What I meant by "surrogate mothers": "central notion of male anxiety: mother running the nostromo (“our man”) with no care for its well-being, the fear of reproduction, the androgynous women characters and the feminisation of the male characters (making them the surrogate mothers),"

Not to belabor the point, but your point on the fear of reproduction screams "chest burster scene". Hard to find a scene that does a better job of putting the fear/pain/violence of child birth onto a man than that.

 

[Hierso]

The Good, The bad & The Ugly.

Yeah the dollars series is "Sequels" but i'd say it counts.

 

[NyQuil]

As for James Cameron, his last few movies are kind of dumb, I agree, but his early career hits (The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2) were all pretty intelligent.

James Cameron is like the Christopher Nolan of action films, where Nolan is the Nolan of thrillers.

Cinephiles get ornery because they don't like the praise heaped upon them, but they certainly elevate popcorn movies to a higher quality.

 

[mrmovies779]

Blade 2 and MIB 2 are 2 I quite enjoy

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

James Cameron is like the Christopher Nolan of action films, where Nolan is the Nolan of thrillers.

Cinephiles get ornery because they don't like the praise heaped upon them, but they certainly elevate popcorn movies to a higher quality.

This cinephile doesn't agree. Nolan tends to be gimmicky, but his films are way more sophisticated and "mastered" than Cameron. The only credit I'd give Cameron is daring to go one-step further than everybody with the use of new tech. Watch T2 and count the number of bad cuts, amateurish jump cuts, etc. For someone who loved tech and neat things, his actual cinematographic abilities are extremely limited. He made a lot of very fun films, but not a single smart one (his smarter film is IMO by far Aliens, and he's just surfing on the original's themes and ideas). I appreciate most of Nolan's films, and quite a few of Cameron's, but I have much more respect for Nolan as a director and artist.

 

[NyQuil]

This cinephile doesn't agree. Nolan tends to be gimmicky, but his films are way more sophisticated and "mastered" than Cameron. The only credit I'd give Cameron is daring to go one-step further than everybody with the use of new tech. Watch T2 and count the number of bad cuts, amateurish jump cuts, etc. For someone who loved tech and neat things, his actual cinematographic abilities are extremely limited. He made a lot of very fun films, but not a single smart one (his smarter film is IMO by far Aliens, and he's just surfing on the original's themes and ideas). I appreciate most of Nolan's films, and quite a few of Cameron's, but I have much more respect for Nolan as a director and artist.

Calling Nolan an artist is definitely going to piss off some of the cinephiles out there.

The rage at the IMDB score for Dark Knight persists to this day.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

This cinephile doesn't agree. Nolan tends to be gimmicky, but his films are way more sophisticated and "mastered" than Cameron. The only credit I'd give Cameron is daring to go one-step further than everybody with the use of new tech. Watch T2 and count the number of bad cuts, amateurish jump cuts, etc. For someone who loved tech and neat things, his actual cinematographic abilities are extremely limited. He made a lot of very fun films, but not a single smart one (his smarter film is IMO by far Aliens, and he's just surfing on the original's themes and ideas). I appreciate most of Nolan's films, and quite a few of Cameron's, but I have much more respect for Nolan as a director and artist.

I'm not a cinephile, but I think T1 at least has some cinematic merit. It takes the chase movie mold, effectively adds sci-fi themes to it and does a great job of building the feeling of impending doom and desperation of trying to run from a terminator.

Beyond that, Cameron's biggest contribution to movie making is being the guy to say to hell with budget, we are going to push the technical envelope of making movies (early adopter of CGI, Avatar being peak 3D craze, etc)

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Calling Nolan an artist is definitely going to piss off some of the cinephiles out there.

The rage at the IMDB score for Dark Knight persists to this day.

IMDB's top 250 films is absolutely ridiculous, there's way too much to rage about in there to pinpoint a single film.

I'm not a cinephile, but I think T1 at least has some cinematic merit. It takes the chase movie mold, effectively adds sci-fi themes to it and does a great job of building the feeling of impending doom and desperation of trying to run from a terminator.

Beyond that, Cameron's biggest contribution to movie making is being the guy to say to hell with budget, we are going to push the technical envelope of making movies (early adopter of CGI, Avatar being peak 3D craze, etc)

I do like T1 a lot, but I'd have to watch it again before praising its merit. It's certainly a fun film, and its tone is more interesting to me than its sequel.

 

[Osprey]

@BigBadBruins7708 was obviously talking about the face-hugger (and if you go back to my comment about Prometheus, i noted its: "first clear inclusion of the vagina dentata in the series (the facehuggers were leaning this way)"). He could have referred to the eggs too, which are laying in a spaceship shaped as two legs with an opening at their junction.

I, on the other hand, was talking about the creature:

View attachment 745052

Which is clearly a cock - you can see it rise, just after Ripley's been walking around in her panties, just at the beginning here:



Yeah, some people didn't get what Scott and O'Bannon were doing (the screenplay is admittedly inspired by Shivers, there's things that are pretty obvious). Kubrick layers his films with meaning too, without making it public knowledge in his staff. The film is widely known in film studies as a gender piece, I wasn't making shit up.

Also, watch how the supermale-creature (the megacock) disposes of its victims: it toys with the females, and it goes through the males from the weakest one to the more virile ones, because yeah, its cock is bigger than theirs.

I've done a little more reading and have to admit that you're right. It's impossible to deny it when I see that Dan O'Bannon, who wrote the screenplay, is quoted as saying:

"I’m going to attack the audience. I’m going to attack them sexually."

"I am going to put in every image I can think of to make the men in the audience cross their legs. Homosexual oral rape, birth. The thing lays its eggs down your throat, the whole number."

My apologies for doubting you. I had Freud's "sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar" echoing in my head, and critics sometimes read a little too much into films, IMO, but it looks like that's anything but the case in this case. I'm happy to be wrong, though, because I love the movie and appreciate hearing what the filmmakers were thinking (even if it was perverted).

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I've done a little more reading and have to admit that you're right. It's impossible to deny it when I see that Dan O'Bannon, who wrote the screenplay, is quoted as saying:

My apologies for doubting you. I had Freud's "sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar" echoing in my head, and critics sometimes read a little too much into films, IMO, but it looks like that's anything but the case in this case. I'm happy to be wrong, though, because I love the movie and appreciate hearing what the filmmakers were thinking (even if it was perverted).

Damn... I had no idea about these quotes. I read your post thinking you were making fun of mine.

And I'll still add that lots of times, films or other works have a lot of "juice" (interpretative paths) that wasn't necessarily conscious or mastered in a focused way by the artist/director and it doesn't make the readings invalid. Interpretation is a very interesting field, my own studies (way back then) were in good parts about what belongs to the film, and what belongs to the reading (specifically in intertextual readings).

 

[Roo Returns]

The answer to this question is a dual Venn Diagram with the names James for Cameron and Horner.

Cameron directed Terminator 2 and Aliens, Horner composed for Star Trek II and Aliens.

I put Terminator 2 as the best. It's the greatest scifi action movie of all-time. The action scenes drive the plot and keep the intensity ramped up. And the whole twist of the T-800 as the good guy was very unheard of.

Star Trek II is next and my favorite movie of all time. As some have said, it's the greatest Star Trek film and what's so unique about it is it's one of the only films that captures the spirit of its predecessor (TOS) but is also unique and completely different. It's a dark moody UBoat in space cat and mouse chess game that uses Moby Dick as a basis. The soundtrack also completely carries the action and brings it to another level. The scene where Kirk has Spock beam up the Genesis party and the get ready for the Mutara Nebula battle, might be my favorite hype moment in any film.

Aliens expands the universe of the predecessor and is intense with action moments. The film pretty much has perfect pacing and is very nuanced if you go back and watch it. It also elevates female characters without beating the audience over the head.

 

[Roo Returns]

Other: Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan

Perhaps too successful, since moronic showrunners keep trying to repeat the concept in Star Trek.

It's the reason I think First Contact is such a mediocre movie. They took the Ahab stuff from Khan and threw in time travel when it should've been a huge Borg battle. The first 5-7 minutes of that movie are what it should've been. I get that FX are expensive and it couldn't be just a battle. Have the Enterprise, Defiant, and one or two other ships (a Steamrunner and Akira Class) be chasing the Borg the entire movie and make it a full batlle.

And then there's Star Trek: Nemesis and Star Trek Into Darkness. Both pieces of crap in their own right.

Before Sunset.

From the listed movies I'd probably pick Blade Runner 2049.

Blade Runner 2049 is criminally underrated. It's a shame that movie is only a cult classic.