The MoFo Top Film Sequels List - Voting

I'm not arguing over it's eligibility for this list. I understand if a movie is a sequel to a TV show it won't be eligible here. I'm just saying that it is a sequel.

Like, with Sex and the City: The Movie... it may be a sequel to the television series, but someone who's never watched it could go to the movies and see it and they don't need to know anything about the show, really. It's better if you know the show, but you can watch that movie without having seen the show.

I feel the same way about Star Trek: The Motion Picture. It's a sequel in some sense that it continues the lives of the characters, but it's still not an actual sequel movie. It's not a "part two." It's the first in the movie series. Same with Sex and the City.

This is for movie sequels/prequels so regards of whatever TV show came before it, if it's the first movie it cannot be counted as a sequel.

I wasn't sure back when discussing with Rodent, but yeah I also say Star Trek 2009 is a reboot, but the sequel can be voted for of course.

What is the thought on Silence of the Lambs? It's based on a sequel to a novel that was previously itself adapted into a film. Does it then count as a sequel?

__________________
Filmquisition: Raking Modern Entertainment Over the Coals Daily
Unrealitymag.com: New Articles Contributed Every Friday
Arcanis' 100 Favorite Films: 2015 Edition

I'll need to change my list then if 2009 Trek isn't counted. No biggie, I would class it as a prequel myself though.


Silence Of The Lambs though ^^
It's the first film of the Hopkins Hannibal Series.
Red Dragon and Hannibal Rising are prequels to Lambs... and Hannibal is the sequel to Lambs.


Manhunter (1986) is a totally separate entity from the Hopkins Hannibal Series.

__________________

Sent mine in.

Good to know (if a bit sad).

Casino Royale still counts, though, right? Just want to make sure on that point.

I'm sorry Rodent!

Hope you can see why it has to be excluded...

I will make a list soon of ineligible sequels/prequels so there's less confusion and we have a clear overview!

the Bond franchise is still something I need to discuss.

I wasn't sure about them but cricket thought they should be eligible. The problem is they aren't really sequels. Some are, but it's mostly just stories with the same character(s) and set in almost the same universe. But I agree that it would be shame not to be able to vote for the likes of Goldfinger and Casino Royale.

I think treat the Bond films by going by the actor.


The first Brosnan Bond isn't, but the rest of his are... the first Connery Bond isn't, but the rest are... etc...

I agree with that. Manhunter and Silence of the Lambs feel like two entirely different things, but Hannibal definitely feels like the sequel to Silence of the Lambs. A bad sequel, but a sequel.

As for the Bond movies... I dare say I think those movies aren't sequels, though I can understand the desire to think of them that way. There are just too many of them and so many different actors... they're kinda like Dr. Who or a TV soap opera. They're just these "movie events" that keep getting made and go on forever. They're serials or something like that. They're not really sequels. They're like how a book series -- The Hardy Boys, The Babysitters Club -- can have 300 or more books in the series, all featuring the same characters, but none of them are really a sequel to anything.

I have now created a list of ineligible films, on the first page.

This will be edited as we go, and as we discuss which movies will be eligible for the countdown.

Hmm, I can think of 18 right off. Must be more I've forgotten. Any recommendations?

does Life, and Nothing More count as a sequel?

Another tough one. The three films of which mentioned movie is a part of is widely considered a trilogy, but only by fans, critics and so forth. The director himself doesn't see it as a trilogy, and only connected by an event.

So who do we look to? Since it was not intended as being a movie series, it kind of goes against that rule, but since it is widely considered so, it also support this other rule. Really is a tough one. And I haven't seen it/them either...

The Koker Trilogy is spiritual rather than being full-on sequels in the full sense of the word.


A more modern spiritual trilogy is The Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy. Shaun Of The Dead, Hot Fuzz and The World's End.
They're just part of a connected film series and the second two films aren't actually sequels.

I still say those Bond movies are not really sequels. I would hate for a sequel countdown to be bombarded with a bunch of James Bond movies.

As you can see previously I've been with that opinion from the start. Bond is not a sequel franchise.

Some of them have direct sequels, like Quantum of Solace is a direct sequel to Casino Royale, but counting some as sequels, and some not, would be unfair and quite messy... I forgot to add them to the front page of ineligible films, I'll do that asap.

Bond's are sequels.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Bonds am crap. They should be discounted on general principal.