The MoFo Top Film Sequels List - Voting

What's the ruling on Kill Bill Vol 2?

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

You will probably have to ask some Trekkies about that. I have only seen the JJ ones.

But as for those, my first thought was that it was a rebooted series and therefore stand alone as a new series, but they do got the original Spock in them. But theydo also have new actors portraying old characters. On wikipedia it is listed as both being the 11th film in the Star Trek franchise AND a reboot. So it's a tough one. Again, ask some Trekkies they must be the right people to take that the decision!


I would like to say no. Because if we include The Avengers then we would need to include many of the other Marvel movies (that are not, in themselves, sequels) taking place in this cross-over world that is the marvel cinematic universe.


A sequel and therefore eligible.

It was released as a sequel, though I know that it is meant as just one long movie, but yeah it is a sequel.

Yes I would say it's eligible!

I don't really get the point of doing this really, don't want to sound harsh, just being honest.

Personally, I'd class all the Treks apart from the first 1979 film.


JJ's films are prequels, set in what they've called an alternate reality... but for all intents and purposes they're prequels.


It's like saying X-Men First Class and X-Men Days Of Future Past aren't part of the current X-Men film lore.
FC and DOFP are prequels... a new cast needed to portray the younger versions of the characters.

__________________

Just for pure fun. Aren't that the reason we are doing all the other lists, and the reason you are a member of a forum at all?

I asked a few people in PM and they liked the idea, and there's already people having their list ready, so at least there's some interest.

I can do some arty stuff for you as well if you need...

I should be running this list since I am The Sequel God, however, the idea never came to me, yet it came to MovieMeditation. I probably would finish the whole countdown in three days. So... I'm sure it's in good hands.

However, I imagine this list will irritate me more than any other list so far. When stuff I want to see on it doesn't make it. This countdown has dark clouds hovering over it.

#TypicalSexyPost

Haha, pretty much all lists are doomed if they don't live up to the The 10 Sexy Celebrity Commandments.

This one, though, is very exciting. I love the idea of a Sequel Countdown. Though I am so sick of this countdown craze.

But what horrors are waiting to arrive? Ghastly unheard of anime sequels or something. Oh, God. Oh, God! Oh, God! Book II. It doesn't stand a chance.

This is a great idea, but the eligibility part is getting confusing. Maybe it would help if someone starts a thread with sequel/prequel recommendations.

I agree that the Star Trek movies should all be eligible, including the 1979 movie Star Trek: The Motion Picture because it's a sequel to the TV show. It's not a reboot, or a remake. It's a continuation of the original story.

I do not agree with this.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is a sequel. Star Trek: The Motion Picture is not.

Sex and the City: The Movie continues after the show went off, too, but I do not consider it a sequel movie. Sex and the City 2, on the other hand, is.

We should not be letting TV life interfere with movie life.

The Star Trek movies are movies. There is an original, first movie (The Motion Picture) and then there are the sequels. The first Star Trek movie is NOT a sequel. It would look ridiculous if it showed up on this list!

This may be harsh but I won't be participating. I'm with Daniel. Have fun though!

I WILL be participating in other decade lists though.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture was made as a continuation of the TV show. It was not a reboot or a remake. It continued the story with the same characters, and the same timeline.

From Wikipedia:

"It is the first film based on Star Trek, and a sequel to the Star Trek television series."

I understand if it's ineligible because the original version is a TV show, and not a movie, but it is a sequel.


I can't comment on Sex and the City because I never watched either the TV show or the movies.

Sexy is right. After all he is my right hand sequel list runner...

As for reboots and remakes.....

This is a little tricky, but I think the first movie of a rebooted series or a remake should be excluded and only the sequel should count.

Thus, Star Trek: Into Darkness would count, but not 2009's Star Trek.

Reboots and things can have their own countdown. THIS is a SEQUEL countdown.

But I totally think -- unless there's a case I'm not thinking about -- that prequels can be allowed. Especially if it's a prequel in the form of a sequel. Stupid example -- Puppet Master III. That's a prequel in the form of a sequel.

However, something like X-Men Origins: Wolverine... that I don't know. Because it's starting off its own separate storyline with a different title and everything. It's not a sequel to the other X-Men movies. Count you count it? Maybe.

The sequel stuff is messy -- HOWEVER -- Star Trek: The Motion Picture is not a sequel!

Can I ask why? (The question is for both you and Daniel.) I'm not complaining, just curious. I think this sounds like it could be fun. It's a bit different from the normal countdowns because it relies on more than one movie for a movie to be eligible.

Well, that's what the geeks at Wikipedia have to say.

I'm sure it is a "sequel" to the television series. But I just think that it's not a sequel movie -- and we're all about movies here. I mean, people who probably never watched the show still went and saw the movie -- because it's a movie. It was playing in a theater. I prefer the Star Trek movies over the television show, personally.