under-rated sequels

[Dominic]

I watched 2010 last night, for the first time in years...and I forgotten what a great film that is. Peter Hyams directed it and it stars Roy Shceider, John Lithgow and Hellen Mirren, and it is, of course, the sequel to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Is it sacriligious that I actually like this better than the first one? For when it was made, it has the most amazing "outer-space" shots ever. Incredible, old-fashioned matte shots of Jupiter and its moons, space ships, space walks, etc. It helped that I was seeing it on an HD channel, of course.

So it got me to thinking...are there any other sequels that you guys think are better than the original that MOST people wouldn't agree with you on?

[EPIC]

Rocky II - It shows that a man as "strong" as Rocky still needs the ecouragement of a loved one in order to give it his all at something he loved even before he met Adrian. I think the 1st 2 Rockys are extrordinary tales of the underdog fighting to come out on top, and Rocky not winning the 1st was brilliant. Which led to the events of II obviously. Even though Rocky IV was great it all went downhill from II.

Superman II - similar to Rocky II in that Superman is torn between his love of saving the world and his love for Lois. And it also probably had the best movie Villians of all time in Luthor and the other 3.

[Borodog]

The Empire Strikes Back is clearly superior to Star Wars, but I don't think it's "underrated"; I'm pretty sure that this is universally accepted.

[disjunction]

Good examples so far. I especially agree with Rocky II.

Airplane II got panned, but it was hilarious and had Bill Shatner. I'm afraid I'll never get over Macho Grande.

[evil twin]

I completley agree about 2010. It's got a better cast, acting, story and pace than 2001. Great film.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

boooo to 2010 being better than 2001.

you're talking about one of the ten best sci movies of all time versus....kind of a basic sci fi movie.

as an aside, 2001 has stood the test of time incredibly well...the movie, viewed today, looks much better than Star Wars.

as for underrated sequels...hmmm...Star Trek 2: The Wrath of KHAAAAAAAANN!!!!!!! is much better than 1. and as a rule of thumb, the even numbered Star Trek movies are better than the odd numbered ones.

[evil twin]

[ QUOTE ]
as for underrated sequels...hmmm...Star Trek 2: The Wrath of KHAAAAAAAANN!!!!!!! is much better than 1. and as a rule of thumb, the even numbered Star Trek movies are better than the odd numbered ones.

[/ QUOTE ]
I thought 2 was widely considered to be the best of all the ST films.. Personally I think 4 is highly underrated. Yes, that's the one with the whales. It really helped that they didn't take themselves too seriously.

[swede123]

Dom, first of all it is VERY sacreligious if you really consider 2010 better than 2001. That being said, I agree that 2010 is a solid movie with a fine cast, good story and effects. It's definitely underrated as far as sequels go. I'm having a hard time coming up with sequels that are actually underrated as most of the ones mentioned (as well as many that have not) are in fact very highly rated, both critical and commercial successes.

Perhaps one answer would be Batman Returns. Many people remember the original movie with fondness, and then skip by the three sequels to instead praise Batman Begins. Well, I think Batman Returns was pretty solid, with an excellent Danny DeVito performance, typically solid Tim Burton style and Keaton returning as Batman.

I also have a soft spot for Predator 2. Obviously it's not anywhere close to the original in overall awesomeness, but still an enjoyable action movie and featuring everyone's favorite Gary Busey.

Swede

[acoustix]

Zod- I thought it was common knowledge that Khan was superior to the original? That is to say, I thought it was rated exactly as it should be: a great movie. I thought the OP was asking just about underrated sequels, not whether or not it was better than it's predecesor.

As for underrated sequels, I'd like to submit Caddyshack II. Obviously not as funny as the first and lacks Rodney, but there is some classic dialogue from Ackroyd, Chase, and Robert Stack. I don't get why it is so hated.

[evolvedForm]

Godfather II is better than The Godfather, but I think many people would agree.