|
Well, Some movies have better sequls than originals, but films like Hitman should have sequals. But
films like Harry potter should never have been made, let alone have epic fail sequals. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
300 should not have a sequel. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes, the new Mummy film was pretty bad. And the Indiana Jones. I just hope the new James Bond one
isn't =( |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Actually I don’t mind when they make a sequel to a bad movie. It’s just another bad movie. But
when they make a bad sequel to a good movie it taints the whole story. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The really bad ones shouldnt. If at first you don't succeed, get a new idea and then try
again. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
AirBud is the worse. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes you are right you get a really good film and then you think oh that's how it ends but then a
rubbish sequel comes out and spoils it. So yes I do agree with you some films should be left at one. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes i hate it especially when the original movie sucks |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
I don't agree because it's really interesting how some movies turn out. Especially scary stupid
ones, such as the house of wax...I heard there's supposed to be another one...but obviously it's not
coming out any time soon I suppose.
On the other hand, James Bond movies are too....UGH! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Mighty Ducks! |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
09 Nov 2008 20:24
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
