What Sequel do you hate the most? What Sequel do you like?

ArtOfDisney · Post by **ArtOfDisney** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:13 am

Cinderella II was horrible.

As for Return to Oz, is that really a sequel or not since it is based on an entire different book in the Frank Baum series.

But it was definately good. And also, Disney didn't make The Wizard of Oz so is it a sequel?

quiden · Post by **quiden** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 10:25 am

Squirrel wrote:...as for the worst, I tend to avoid the sequels, most of them...because I don't want them to bring down the original film

I agree. I see no point in Cinderella II or the Jungle Book II. I guess I can kinda see it in original stories like the Rescuers or Lady and the Tramp because they have character development that they've done themselves, but I don't like the thought of them eventually making sequels to all of their classics. I mean, how blatantly money hungry can you be?

That said, I actually did really enjoy Lady and the Tramp II. My daughter really loves it.

As for the best, I'd say it would be Rescuers Down under. That one really blew the original (one of the worst disney films) out of the water!

I haven't seen many of the others for the quoted reason above, but I didn't really care too much for Stitch. It was OK (I wasn't crazy about the movie either) but it was such a segue to the series that it seem very gratuitous.

Besides, what more do you have to say than "and they lived happily ever after?"

Prince Adam · Post by **Prince Adam** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:35 pm

My absolute favourite sequels are:

Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas
-why do I like it?
-it combines my two favourite things, and combines them well!

Rescuers Down Under
-the only sequel worthy to be one of the animated classics

Return to NeverLand
-as good as the original (although Tink and Wendy didn't have enough screen time)

Lady and the Tramp 2: Scamp's Adventure
-great!

Story-wise, Little Mermaid 2 and Pocahontas 2 were good, and had good potential, but the animation was crappy. The Lion King 2 had too many story-holes to be good, and Hunchback 2 is just awful.

Prince Adam · Post by **Prince Adam** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:35 pm

My absolute favourite sequels are:

Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas
-why do I like it?
-it combines my two favourite things, and combines them well!

Rescuers Down Under
-the only sequel worthy to be one of the animated classics

Return to NeverLand
-as good as the original (although Tink and Wendy didn't have enough screen time)

Lady and the Tramp 2: Scamp's Adventure
-great!

Story-wise, Little Mermaid 2 and Pocahontas 2 were good, and had good potential, but the animation was crappy. The Lion King 2 had too many story-holes to be good, and Hunchback 2 is just awful.

Disneykid · Post by **Disneykid** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:09 pm

Worst Sequel: The Hunchback of Notre Dame II. I'm having trouble coming up with something positive to say about it even though I can usually find some sort of redeeming qualities in other sequels. Crappy animation, un-enthusiastic voice work (can you blame them?), completely forgettable songs (even truly horrible songs stick with you), and a plain out cliched script that obviously wasn't completely thought out.

Best Sequel: Pooh's Grand Adventure: The Search for Christopher Robin. A very, very charming sequel with decent animation and at least one very good song ("Wherever You Are"). The original was so simple that making sequels and spin-offs in the spirit of it come easily, but this one is much more in tune than The Tigger Movie and Piglet's Big Movie. The only thing I would've liked for them to have done was have the characters interact with the narrator more and give more of the sense of a storybook like with the original.

Udvarnoky · Post by **Udvarnoky** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:14 pm

ArtOfDisney wrote:Cinderella II was horrible.

As for Return to Oz, is that really a sequel or not since it is based on an entire different book in the Frank Baum series.

But it was definately good. And also, Disney didn't make The Wizard of Oz so is it a sequel?

Well, Return to Oz is actually based upon the second and third Oz books. However, the screenplay was tinkered with to make it sort of work as a true followup to The Wizard of Oz (ala ruby slippers). Also, I'm sure that if the same crew who made Return to Oz made their version of The Wizard of Oz, it would be the same sort of mood.

In any case, Return to Oz is, at least by my definition, a Disney sequel. It was a sequel to a movie, and it was made by Disney. Just because Wizard wasn't Disney doesn't really make a difference... to me, anyway.

Prince Adam · Post by **Prince Adam** » Sat Nov 22, 2003 6:40 am

Disneykid wrote:Worst Sequel: The Hunchback of Notre Dame II. I'm having trouble coming up with something positive to say about it even though I can usually find some sort of redeeming qualities in other sequels. Crappy animation, un-enthusiastic voice work (can you blame them?), completely forgettable songs (even truly horrible songs stick with you), and a plain out cliched script that obviously wasn't completely thought out.

Best Sequel: Pooh's Grand Adventure: The Search for Christopher Robin. A very, very charming sequel with decent animation and at least one very good song ("Wherever You Are"). The original was so simple that making sequels and spin-offs in the spirit of it come easily, but this one is much more in tune than The Tigger Movie and Piglet's Big Movie. The only thing I would've liked for them to have done was have the characters interact with the narrator more and give more of the sense of a storybook like with the original.

I forgot about those! Yes, Pooh's Grand Adventure and Tigger Movie are definitely the best sequels. Have yet to see Piglet's Big Movie, so can't comment on that.

As for the TV series and the DTV's like "Spookable Pooh" and "Valentine for You" and "Springtime with Roo", I don't consider those sequels, more along the lines of spin-offs.

OH, The Santa Clause 2 is a great sequel.

Zorro · Post by **Zorro** » Sun Nov 23, 2003 5:19 pm

I have only seen bits and pieces of these animated sequels, but nevertheless, I hate them all. More precisely, I hate what I have seen: substandard animation, along with uninspired stories and songs.

Walt Disney once said, "You can't follow pigs with pigs." He was referring to attempts to follow the huge success of Three Little Pigs with sequels, none of which could match the original, either financially or artistically.

I couldn't agree more.

Except for The Rescuers Down Under and Toy Story 2, these films diminish and demean the originals.

Grunches · Post by **Grunches** » Sun Nov 23, 2003 11:32 pm

I'm really surprised that a lot of people hated Cinderella 2. I thought it was ok, but it still ruined the first one. My other shock is that people are liking the Return to Oz. I thought that was a little strange to the orignal

STASHONE · Post by **STASHONE** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:46 am

'Return To Oz' wasn't really intended to be taken as a direct sequel to Wizard, it was based on a lengthy book series by L. Frank Baum and though I haven't read any of his novels, the film apparently captured the darker, more cynical psychological ambience of his books and characters more so than the first MGM film. It was not an adaption of a sequel, it was a take on an alternative installment in the Oz stories. The direction, performances and hauntingly gothic musical score were all magnificent. The movie introduced many excellent characters from Baum's novels and the only real major flaw with this film is that it will always be overshadowed by the success of it's predecessor and unjustly compared - This is not an upbeat inspirational musical starring Judy Garland, it is not filmed in bright solid technicolor nor was it intended to mirror the look of 1939's 'The Wizard Of Oz'. This film is a masterful work of art in it's own right and shouldn't be taken in comparisson to Wizard. It's a brilliant artistic movie and definitely should not be categorized in this thread with the likes of Disney's horrible animated direct-to-video cheapquels.

ArtOfDisney · Post by **ArtOfDisney** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 7:14 am

I Love Return to Oz, I think it is an excellent movie and would love to see other Oz books made into film using this style.

Joe Carioca · Post by **Joe Carioca** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:56 am

The ones I hate the most is "Cinderella II" and "Belle's Magical World". "Little Mermaid II", "Hunchback II" and "Milo's Return" were very crappy as well.
I thought "The Lion King II" had its moments (some songs are very good), but overall, the film was not good. "Return to Never Land" and "Scamp's Adventure" are somewhat nice, though desnecessary. "Beauty and the Beast's Enchanted Christmas" wasn't great either, but it has the spirit of Christmas and it is worth just to hear Page O'Hare sing.
For me, the best sequel was "Pooh's Grand Adventure". I also like "Tigger's Movie" a lot, but I don't know if this one is officialy a sequel.

"The Rescuers Down Under" and "Fantasia 2000" are two animated masterpieces, but since they are 'classics', they don't deserve to be grouped with the other cheapo sequels.

Kim Olav Svines · Post by **Kim Olav Svines** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:11 am

I like most sequels. I haven't seen Cinderella II or Belle's Magical World yet, although they're sitting on my shelf. Hunchback Of Notre Dame II wasn't as good either.

I love all Pooh related, and Jungle Book 2 was great. That also applies to Little Mermaid II, Aladdin sequels, Lion King II, Return to Neverland, and Stitch! The Movie. Although a compilation of TV-episodes, both Tarzan & Jane and Atlantis II was good.

Udvarnoky · Post by **Udvarnoky** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:49 pm

STASHONE wrote:'Return To Oz' wasn't really intended to be taken as a direct sequel to Wizard, it was based on a lengthy book series by L. Frank Baum and though I haven't read any of his novels, the film apparently captured the darker, more cynical psychological ambience of his books and characters more so than the first MGM film. It was not an adaption of a sequel, it was a take on an alternative installment in the Oz stories. The direction, performances and hauntingly gothic musical score were all magnificent. The movie introduced many excellent characters from Baum's novels and the only real major flaw with this film is that it will always be overshadowed by the success of it's predecessor and unjustly compared - This is not an upbeat inspirational musical starring Judy Garland, it is not filmed in bright solid technicolor nor was it intended to mirror the look of 1939's 'The Wizard Of Oz'. This film is a masterful work of art in it's own right and shouldn't be taken in comparisson to Wizard. It's a brilliant artistic movie and definitely should not be categorized in this thread with the likes of Disney's horrible animated direct-to-video cheapquels.

Indeed.

Udvarnoky · Post by **Udvarnoky** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:50 pm

I anxiously await Disney's re-release of Return to Oz on DVD, and pray that it has special features.

Jens · Post by **Jens** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:39 pm

I saw The Jungle Book 2 today and I really think that this is a worthy sequel for The Jungle Book. I especially like the song "Jungle Rhytm", but I thought that the voice of Mowgli didn't come out that well. The other voices were rising above it and it was very crowed. The story was great and the animation was terrific. I really liked it

Lady · Post by **Lady** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:20 pm

I hated Pocahontas II. It ruined the original for me. That said, I think the most poorly made sequel was Cinderella II. While watching it I felt like I was watching a poorly made TV cartoon series.

michelle · Post by **michelle** » Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:19 am

i tend to veer away from sequels so i haven't seen that many... once i hear 'direct-to-video' i run a mile in the opposite direction ... but of the ones i have seen i suppose simba's pride was okay ... not even close to the original though ... and i agree with the general consensus here that cinderella was pretty ...

embarrassing ...

quiden · Post by **quiden** » Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:18 am

Lady wrote:I hated Pocahontas II. It ruined the original for me. That said, I think the most poorly made sequel was Cinderella II. While watching it I felt like I was watching a poorly made TV cartoon series.

I agree with most that the sequels are pretty bad and the quality expectation from me when I hear "direct to video" drops about 20,000 leagues, but I didn't mind Pocahontas II, especially knowing that Pocahontas did go to england with that other guy and actually ended up marrying him in real life, so I liked how it continued her real story. I don't really count the feature Pocahontas as one of Disney's greatest achievements, though.

nyte · Post by **nyte** » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:02 am

I have twin reasons for 2 different movies on this as worst.

co-winners and reasons

1) Cinderella II - Not so much becasue of the content, but becasue a sequel of this SHOULD NEVER have been made.

2) But based on content, I have to agree with Disneykid, Hunchback II was gawd awful. Everytime I think of it I hear that song "F-F-F-Falling in love" I just gag.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

What Sequel do you hate the most? What Sequel do you like?

What Sequel do you hate the most?