T2: Greatest Sequel of all Time.

[superpanavision70mm]

I am sure that everyone has a difference of opinion when it comes to films, especially sequels. They are usually pointless, redundant, amateurish, unnecessary and most of all insulting in their attempts to get more money from movie-goers. However, now and again a film comes along that actually takes the narrative even further and sometimes out-matches it's predecessor. When I am talking about sequel I DO NOT mean second installments, which is why THE GODFATHER II does not count because it's based on a series similar to why LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS would also not count. That being said it's in my humble opinion that one of the greatest sequels ever made is James Cameron's TERMINATOR 2, aka T2. Here is why...

1. The film set the new standard for digital visual effects that actually look great even after 15+ years. Not only are the visual effects impressive for 1991, but are far better than some of the lame sp. effects that we get today. Without a doubt this is the film that would take everything to a new level in special effects that had not been seen since 1977's STAR WARS.

2. Narratively speaking this film is more complex than THE TERMINATOR and manages to be more than just a big action flick/sci-fi thriller...it also manages to be an important work of Science Fiction with key elements, themes, and writing.

3. Role reversal-not too many films can pull this one off, but in this case the film actually takes the villian of the previous film and turns it into the hero of the sequel. Not only is this done, but also done well without any confusion. Of course even more importantly is the fact that you don't even need to see THE TERMINATOR in order to understand T2, but it certainly helps and adds to a new level of complexity.

4. Sound design: Hands down this is still one of the most impressively designed films when it comes to it's sound. This is one of the few films that utilized CDS (Cinema Digital Sound), which was prior to the change-over to the multi-channel systems. The 70mm prints of T2 were encoded with true 5.1 sound and that design was incredibly clever giving amazing life to the score, but also the sound effects. The DTS DVD released by Artisan a few years back finally gave some life to just how amazing that sound was and the new Blu-ray DTS track even goes a bit further showcasing the depth and punch that this film was meant to have. This is a film that when I saw it theatrically shook the life out of me at nearly every chance it had. Not only that, but it was memerable that even after one viewing you immediately remember the sound cues.

5. Arnold manages to not only act, but pulls off the role of both action star and also a dramatic robot...not easy to have emotion as a robot, which is usually his only performance...that wooden role, but here he has a bit more depth, which is evident towards the end of the film.

6. The film ran 2 hr 20 min. theatrically and about 2 hr. and 30 min w/ the dir. cut. Both cuts are impressive and it was nearly impossible to find an action film of this length in 1991. Not only that, but it never gets boring, but the films pace keeps going strong from beginning to end.

7. The film holds one of the best trailers still to this date, which was made by Stan Winston for $150,000 and is not a typical crappy action film trailer, but instead a creative idea instead of early footage thrown together to entice people to see the film.

8. About 200 different types of weapons are seen in this film.

9. First movie to cost $100 million and not suck. (anyone seen BALLISTIC: ECKS VS. SEVER?)

10. Still a huge evergreen title that sells heavy on every format released. The original VHS copies went for big money, the LaserDisc sold incredibly well, the film has been issued to DVD repeatedly and now it's on Blu-ray. A key title no doubt!

Anyone else have some opinions?

[likeitloud]

I'm with ya 100%. The audio/visuals in that flick are still better than anything out
there. (Minus the last three Star Wars). I do think Indiana Jones(Temple Of Doom)
holds up well. On the dvd, lucasfilm did there magic, and it's VERY good, in the
same audio/visual sense. And the story ain't bad either.

[RGA]

I am going to agree with you on the quality of T2 in what you say except that I think the original film is better. Though i actually think the original film is better for a different reason than most people I suspect. This is no slam at all to T2 but for me is a big compliment to the original. Best sequals don;t necessarily need to outshine the first. In every technological way the second one beats the first. Nevertheless, the original was the original and it had exceptionally tight pacing, a genuinely formidble killing machine "that will not stop" until it's deadly objective is made. The original works supremely well as a romance film in the best sense of the word and that is how I have come to appreciate it more over the years. There is character growth -- it works more for me because of the average woman Hamilton was playing and the tension involved. The Terminator truly put Arnold on the map, it was done on a shoestring budget.

T3 was promising until the dopey last half hour railroaded what could have been something a lot better because it had some of the pacing elements of the first combined with the FX but man what a brain dead last act.

Other Sequels I have liked -- Aliens (I liked this better than the original) and Superman II and Spiderman 2 which I also liked better than the original.

I can't think of others I liked more than the first but I have liked sequals (Indian Jones and the Last Crusade).

[Defshep]

Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan was miles ahead of The Motion Picture in terms of story, pacing, and action. X-Men 2 blew X-Men away. But I'll agree with ya' on T2. Absolutely the perfect example of how to make a sequel work, because you didn't have to see the first installment to enjoy it.

[superpanavision70mm]

I agree with some of the other choices, which certainly have high entertainment value, but if you look at my rational for T2...it's also about technical achievements, production, and storytelling that help set it ahead.

[kexodusc]

T2 was great, but Godfather 2 still wins best sequel by a landslide. Without special effects.

But yeah, look at Aliens and Alien 3 as examples of sequels that struggled to out do the original. Moreso the 3rd installment.

T2 has really held up well against time. A lot of sci-fi movies can become very dated, very fast - Star Trek, Superman, come to mind. The outdated effects take away from the movie.

Arnold had some pretty good films for a few years there - then he decided he was a comedian with Kindergarten Cop, and that was the beginning of the end. Still waiting for the next Hollywood action hero - Vin Diesel ain't even close..

[likeitloud]

Agree all the way. "The Rock" is trying, But he ain't arnold. His 2 post T2 flick's "Eraser"
and "True Lies" are pretty good action films. His shoes will be hard to fill.

[superpanavision70mm]

I thought I made it clear that THE GODFATHER II does not necessarily qualify as a sequel as much as a second installment in a series.

[topspeed]

What are the qualifications for making something a series? Because there was a Godfather III? Are we simply forgetting T3 because it sucked so bad? GF III came out 16 years after GFII! That's a series?!?

If T2 qualifies, GFII should as well.

Of course, all of this is purely academic as everyone knows the greatest sequel of all time is Debbie Does Dallas 2.

[Woochifer]

I would put Godfather, Part II at the top of the list as well. At the very least, it's the only sequel to a Best Picture that equaled or surpassed the original (how does The Evening Star, French Connection II, or The Sting II strike anyone?). And it's not quite the same as The Lord of the Rings, because LOTR was filmed all at the same time, and everybody knew from the beginning that the next installment would be a simple continuation. The Godfather was not made with any presumption that another movie would follow.

As far as others go, the best sequel for me would be The Road Warrior (Mad Max 2). I thought that the original Mad Max had some good moments, but was a flawed movie overall. The Road Warrior surpassed the original in every facet by not trying to rehash the original premise, but advancing it far enough ahead in time so that a very different world and thematic interpretation could be created. It remains one of my all-time favorite movies, sequel or not.

Another personal favorite sequel that not too many other people liked would be Gremlins 2, which dispensed with the quasi-horror elements from the original (BTW, I did not like the original Gremlins) and went entirely in a cartoonish satirical direction with the sequel. Though a lot of the satirical references in that movie don't hold up well over time, that movie had a sense of fun, abandon, and refreshing lack of self-importance about it that I don't see with a lot of sequels. For example, I don't know of any sequels that would do something like including a cameo from film critic Leonard Maltin where he hashes over how much he hated the original movie.

T2, Aliens, and The Wrath of Khan are other very good ones that others have mentioned.

The Washington Post recently had an article detailing how The Road Warrior is the best example of how to create a sequel that surpasses the original.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/09/AR2006060900331_pf.html

P.S. This list is contingent on the fact that I have yet to see Debbie Does Dallas 2! :D

[ericl]

I
Another personal favorite sequel that not too many other people liked would be Gremlins 2, which dispensed with the quasi-horror elements from the original (BTW, I did not like the original Gremlins) and went entirely in a cartoonish satirical direction with the sequel. Though a lot of the satirical references in that movie don't hold up well over time, that movie had a sense of fun, abandon, and refreshing lack of self-importance about it that I don't see with a lot of sequels. For example, I don't know of any sequels that would do something like including a cameo from film critic Leonard Maltin where he hashes over how much he hated the original movie.



HA, I saw this a few months ago after not having seen it since it came out when I was a kid. I laughed my ass off!! Hilarious movie.

I've never seen Road Warrior, and I don't remember the original.. Maybe I should check them out. Do I need to see the original first? I haven't watched it since i was about 10 years old.

[Woochifer]

HA, I saw this a few months ago after not having seen it since it came out when I was a kid. I laughed my ass off!! Hilarious movie.

I've never seen Road Warrior, and I don't remember the original.. Maybe I should check them out. Do I need to see the original first? I haven't watched it since i was about 10 years old.

I think The Road Warrior stands up very well on its own. You don't really need to know the back story, because the sequel is largely disconnected from the events of the first movie. And IMO, that's why it's such a great sequel, because it doesn't try to simply be a bigger, louder, and longer retread of the original.

For one thing, aside from Max, none of the other characters from the original appear in either of the sequels. In the original movie, Max was a cop trying to hold together the last pockets of civilization together in a post-apocalyptic future. In The Road Warrior and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, all the action takes place after urban society had already collapsed, and all that's left are nomadic groups roaming the backcountry fending for themselves.

While Mad Max at its core was a classic revenge tale similar to many westerns and martial arts pics, The Road Warrior was more thematic in its vision of the future, where instead of entire nations going to war over oil or other valuable resources, you're left with these gangs killing each other so they can rob one another of a few gallons of gasoline. Add some of the best action scenes ever filmed, and you got one helluva movie.

[eisforelectronic]

the Blu-ray version is simply amazing!

[superpanavision70mm]

The reason why I mentioned THE GODFATHER Part II is because I knew that if I made the claim that T2 is one of the greatest, if not THE greatest sequel would be crying that THE GODFATHER II is the best....still to my amazement people are still crying that tune. I do not personally believe that THE GODFATHER II is better than the first film. My point with T2 is that it is a highly superior film to the orginal and I think my 10 reasons are excellent proof of that. If anyone can come up with 10 vastly detailed reasons why GODFATHER II is superior to the first film than I would be happy to see that.

[Woochifer]

The reason why I mentioned THE GODFATHER Part II is because I knew that if I made the claim that T2 is one of the greatest, if not THE greatest sequel would be crying that THE GODFATHER II is the best....still to my amazement people are still crying that tune. I do not personally believe that THE GODFATHER II is better than the first film. My point with T2 is that it is a highly superior film to the orginal and I think my 10 reasons are excellent proof of that. If anyone can come up with 10 vastly detailed reasons why GODFATHER II is superior to the first film than I would be happy to see that.

Well, it's obvious that you knew ahead of time that Godfather Part II would be the odds-on pick for best sequel by most people, and that's for a very good reason. The Godfather is one of those consensus top ten all-time movies -- a tall order for any sequel to even come close to. That Part II would be so widely considered close to, equal to, or surpassing the original is an unprecedented and unequaled accomplishment because the first one is so widely considered one of the best, if not, the best movie of all time.

Just look at IMDB's average user ratings -- The Godfather is #1 with an average 9.1 rating, while The Godfather, Part II is #3 with an average 8.9 rating.

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top

Here's a case where the sequel is not only the top rated sequel, but very close to being the top rated movie, period. I'm certainly not the only one who considers The Godfather, Part II the best sequel and at least the equal of the original, as evidenced by the user comments entered on the IMDB site.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071562/usercomments

If your criteria for "best sequel" is the degree to which the sequel improves upon the original, then an argument can be made for T2, but only because of the pantheonic stature that The Godfather occupies. There's only so much room for improvement when a movie like The Godfather is already considered by many to be the best ever.

Of course, if the criteria for "best sequel" is how much the sequel improves upon the original, then I would put The Road Warrior at the top of my list because it's so far superior to the original Mad Max and because IMO it's a great movie in its own right.

Your list of improvements that T2 makes over The Terminator is largely populated by the technical categories. Well, it's easy for T2 to make those leaps forward when The Terminator was a low budget movie originally recorded in mono and filmed with low budget stop motion model effects, while the sequel had a budget more than 10x the original and 7+ years of new technology available. While T2 did improve upon the original in many ways, it did not have the weight of a consensus top ten film to live up to either.

As for why The Godfather Part II would be considered superior to the original, here are some of my reasons:

- having Part II tell both the backstory and the continuation story, and do both so effectively
- the Sicilian backstory of Vito Corleone provided a compelling undercurrent to the continuation of Michael's story, and a great character study that contrasts the character flaws of the son with the circumstances that led Vito to power.
- the audacity to do the Sicilian backstory entirely in Italian; subtitles in Hollywood films are always considered highly risky, yet Coppola and Puzo did half of a highly anticipated sequel in Italian, and it worked big time
- Part II simply had more of an epic feel to it; from the Ellis Island scenes to the Little Italy scenes, Part II was telling a much broader immigrant story, which was not present in Part I.
- Robert DeNiro as Vito; as great an actor as Brando was, DeNiro showed a more compelling screen presence as the young Vito
- Al Pacino stepping up big time to take over the central character role in Part II, plus all the other carryover actors from Part I improving on the quality of the acting
- less of the melodramatic; the family bonds are a big reason why audiences connected with The Godfather, but I did not like some of the more soap operatic melodrama that was present in the original. Part II had a leaner treatment of the family story, and it had better pacing, despite the longer running length.
- the central conflict between Michael and Fredo had a more compelling and tragic edge to it than any of the family subplots from Part I -- it's one thing for Michael to kill all his enemies, it's quite another to be betrayed by his own brother and order his execution
- the parallels between events depicted in the movie and actual historical events (e.g., the Keyfauver hearings, the fall of Batista in Cuba, the infiltration by the mob in Las Vegas, etc.) make for more interesting repeat viewings
- the revenge plot of Don Vito vs. Don Fanucci is one of the best "payback" moments I've seen in a movie, yet it managed to book-end a 3 1/2 hour movie.
- Part II IMO shows deeper character development than did Part I
- the technical aspects, from the cinematography to the art direction and the sound are all improved over the original

[superpanavision70mm]

Yeah because the IMDB is 'the law' when it comes to movie ratings.

[superpanavision70mm]

Also by your standards Wooch then what you are saying is that 2010: FIRST CONTACT should have blown away 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY since it was made 15 years later and technology became more advanced? Hardly.

I am not by any means saying that any of the GODFATHER films are in any way, shape, or form bad. They are all great to some degree. My whole point here is that when people say that sequels suck....T2 is a prime example of a film that is truly better by leaps and bounds....the first two GODFATHER films are much closer together in their achievements.

My ratings on all of the films would be as follows:

(1-10) 1 lowest, 10 highest

THE GODFATHER 10
THE GODFATHER II 9
THE GODFATHER III 7

THE TERMINATOR 7
THE TERMINATOR II (T2) 9
THE TERMINATOR III 6

So by this you can see that both T2 and THE GODFATHER II are both 9's. However, I do not really consider THE GODFATHER films to be sequels as much as part of a series and for those that have seen the re-edited version in which Coppola made in order to raise money for APOCOLYPSE NOW you will understand what I am talking about. Then again you might not since I apparently know very little by Wooch's impression. I don't think that you could edit together THE TERMINATOR and T2 quite as well.

I'll stick to my guns and still say that T2 is without a doubt one of the best if not THE best sequel at this point in time.

[Woochifer]

Also by your standards Wooch then what you are saying is that 2010: FIRST CONTACT should have blown away 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY since it was made 15 years later and technology became more advanced? Hardly.

Nope, you're the one who's including things like the trailer, the sound design, the number of weapons used, the length of the movie, the budget, etc. as reasons why you find the sequel superior to the original. If anyone's criteria would put 2010 over 2001, it certainly would not be mine.


I am not by any means saying that any of the GODFATHER films are in any way, shape, or form bad. They are all great to some degree. My whole point here is that when people say that sequels suck....T2 is a prime example of a film that is truly better by leaps and bounds....the first two GODFATHER films are much closer together in their achievements.

My ratings on all of the films would be as follows:

(1-10) 1 lowest, 10 highest

THE GODFATHER 10
THE GODFATHER II 9
THE GODFATHER III 7

THE TERMINATOR 7
THE TERMINATOR II (T2) 9
THE TERMINATOR III 6

Well, that's fine. But, I think that an equally valid argument can be made that a sequel that matches or exceeds an original movie of The Godfather's stature is more of an achievement than a sequel that's notably better than a less stellar original.


So by this you can see that both T2 and THE GODFATHER II are both 9's. However, I do not really consider THE GODFATHER films to be sequels as much as part of a series and for those that have seen the re-edited version in which Coppola made in order to raise money for APOCOLYPSE NOW you will understand what I am talking about. Then again you might not since I apparently know very little by Wooch's impression. I don't think that you could edit together THE TERMINATOR and T2 quite as well.

Boy, this must be way past your bedtime, gettin' a bit cranky now! :incazzato:

You knew that The Godfather Part II would get brought into any discussion of greatest sequels, since it's the highest rated sequel on nearly all of the major "all-time best" lists (the IMDB poll is but one among many). If you'd rather go beyond that movie and discuss others, why not be up front about it rather than creating some arbitrary criteria about Godfather Part II being a "series" rather than a "sequel" just to avoid discussing it? People are bringing The Godfather Part II into the discussion because they don't see the point of that premise either.

And BTW, I have seen the sequential edit of the Godfather I and II -- it's far from seamless and required filming extra scenes to bridge the main storylines.

Like I said, I don't consider The Godfather Part II comparable to LOTR because The Godfather was not made with another movie as a given, and it required additional material beyond the original novel to tell the story. If The Godfather had flopped at the box office, Coppola would have never shot a single frame of film for Part II, while most of the footage for all three LOTR movies was already in the can by the time FOTR came out. Plus, if The Godfather was intended to be a "series" from the beginning, why would all of the major plot threads and loose ends be resolved by the end of each movie, and why would Coppola have had to do a whole new round of writing and preproduction for the sequels?

Are you saying that the Star Wars trilogy would not count either? That because Empire Strikes Back is a continuation of a "series" that could be edited together with Star Wars and Return of the Jedi, that it doesn't count as a sequel?


I'll stick to my guns and still say that T2 is without a doubt one of the best if not THE best sequel at this point in time.

Hmmm, you sure went from "in my humble opinion" to "without a doubt" in a hurry! :rolleyes: No one's asking you to change your mind, but obviously not everyone's going to agree with your choice or your reasoning for excluding The Godfather, Part II from the discussion.

[superpanavision70mm]

I am not asking anyone to agree with my opinion. I simply stated it and I am not convinced that there are too many films that have managed to do what this particular sequel has done.

I also knew that people would challenge what I said as well because people like yourself have to have some comment on all of my posts because you find some sort of entertainment value out of it and also think that you are always right about everything.

"in my humble opinion" and "without a doubt" are not polar opposites in case you weren't sure what the meaning of the word "humble" and "doubt" meant. Thanks for the concern though. The phrase "in my humble opinion" was being used to ensure that people were understanding that this is MY opinion based on my experience and that I am stating it with a humble attitude because I am not claiming to know-it-all. The phrase "without a doubt" is my expression that there is little doubt in my mind that T2 is one of the best sequels made if not THE best...as you can read what it says above.

I'm not exactly what point you are trying to make except tear apart every little thing that I say just like you have in the past with just about all the posts that I leave.

I'll state this once again...

I am NOT saying that THE GODFATHER II and T2 are on the same level. Sure, if you ask the majority of people (esp. those IMDB users) than most people are going to say that they think that THE GODFATHER II is a superior film. However, my statement is that T2 is far superior to THE TERMINATOR and excels much further than THE GODFATHER II does from THE GODFATHER. I'm not sure how I can make that much clearer...I thought I was clear, but maybe not.

[superpanavision70mm]

The reason that I stated that THE GODFATHER II is more like a series component instead of a pure sequel is for this reason....

Often people critiicize sequels for being 'unnecessary' and MOST of them are. However, if a movie is done because it's part of a larger story already than it's not unnecessary, but rather made because one film was not enough to capture the entire over-arching story. Thus, LORD OF THE RINGS would have been silly if they only made the first part....it's only one installment of the entire saga.

[topspeed]

You're an interesting guy, SP. In your OP, you ask "Anyone else have some opinions?" and when you get some, albeit different from yours, you go into attack mode. When the logic disputes your claims, you change the criteria. Oooohkaaay...

If the criteria is now how much better the sequel is than the original, the winner is easily Road Warrior. Why? The Terminator was a very good movie (it had to be for Arnold to milk that many miles out of "I'll be baaack.") while Mad Max was pretty cheesy (whaddya want for a low budget film shot in the Outback?). While I think T2 is a better movie than RR on its own merits, the difference in quality from both originals greatly favors RR.

BTW, in respect to our new system of classification, DDD2 is no longer the best sequel of all time. All porns, umm...suck.

[superpanavision70mm]

What movie is RR?

[topspeed]

RR=Road Warrior

It was late and I had visions of Debbie in my pan...um, head.

Sorry.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

4. Sound design: Hands down this is still one of the most impressively designed films when it comes to it's sound. This is one of the few films that utilized CDS (Cinema Digital Sound), which was prior to the change-over to the multi-channel systems. The 70mm prints of T2 were encoded with true 5.1 sound and that design was incredibly clever giving amazing life to the score, but also the sound effects. The DTS DVD released by Artisan a few years back finally gave some life to just how amazing that sound was and the new Blu-ray DTS track even goes a bit further showcasing the depth and punch that this film was meant to have. This is a film that when I saw it theatrically shook the life out of me at nearly every chance it had. Not only that, but it was memerable that even after one viewing you immediately remember the sound cues.

Just a small point, CDS was the second multichannel 5.1 format but the first DIGITAL multichannel format. The first multichannel delivery format was Dolby six track format number 43. CDS is a little different than Dolby Digital and Dts in that it used 6 full range channels (the LFE was a full range channel) used 16bit 44.1khz sample rate on uncompressed PCM signals.

There were only 10 70mm prints ever released, and those were relegated to Road show houses in Los Angeles and New York.

[Woochifer]

I am not asking anyone to agree with my opinion. I simply stated it and I am not convinced that there are too many films that have managed to do what this particular sequel has done.

And nobody has disputed that point.


I also knew that people would challenge what I said as well because people like yourself have to have some comment on all of my posts because you find some sort of entertainment value out of it and also think that you are always right about everything.

You asked for opinions and got them. No one's fault but your own that you don't seem to handle disagreement very well, especially when you knew ahead of time which movie most people were going to cite in response to your topic. If you're going to react like this the instant a dissenting sentiment gets uttered, you might as well demand that people only post if they agree with you, since that seems to be what you want anyway.


"in my humble opinion" and "without a doubt" are not polar opposites in case you weren't sure what the meaning of the word "humble" and "doubt" meant. Thanks for the concern though. The phrase "in my humble opinion" was being used to ensure that people were understanding that this is MY opinion based on my experience and that I am stating it with a humble attitude because I am not claiming to know-it-all. The phrase "without a doubt" is my expression that there is little doubt in my mind that T2 is one of the best sequels made if not THE best...as you can read what it says above.

Whatever. :rolleyes:


I'm not exactly what point you are trying to make except tear apart every little thing that I say just like you have in the past with just about all the posts that I leave.

Your thin-skinned defensiveness whenever someone disagrees with your "without a doubt" opinions (among other things) has gotten awfully reminiscent of our two-time banned wannabe "professional" DVD reviewer Lexmark3200. Is it just coincidental that you joined the site and started flooding it with threads the exact same month that he got banned? :skep:

[Woochifer]

Just a small point, CDS was the second multichannel 5.1 format but the first DIGITAL multichannel format. The first multichannel delivery format was Dolby six track format number 43. CDS is a little different than Dolby Digital and Dts in that it used 6 full range channels (the LFE was a full range channel) used 16bit 44.1khz sample rate on uncompressed PCM signals.

There were only 10 70mm prints ever released, and those were relegated to Road show houses in Los Angeles and New York.

First time I saw T2 was in 70mm at the now-defunct Cinedome in Orange. Quite an experience seeing it on that deeply curved Cinerama screen!

One of those 70mm prints also wound up at the Galaxy Theatre in San Francisco. Both of their THX auditoriums showed T2 during the first run, one had a 70mm mag print, while the other had the 35mm CDS setup. I opted for the 70mm screening.

[superpanavision70mm]

Oh I see, so now you have gone to the length of not just disagreeing with me about every petty thing that you can think of, but now you are trying to make the claim that I am some other person....that's pretty pathetic. I have been around the AR site for quite some time, but never crossed over to the actual forum part until more recently. I originally only posted in the photo gallery.

[dean_martin]

Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me - mini-me more laughs than the original.

Ace Ventura When Nature Calls - epic scale compared to Pet Detective. Nacho Libre tips it's hat to the opening scene of this classic.

(What was the criteria again?)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me - mini-me more laughs than the original.

Ace Ventura When Nature Calls - epic scale compared to Pet Detective. Nacho Libre tips it's hat to the opening scene of this classic.

(What was the criteria again?)

Deano,
Tell me that you DIDN'T go see Nacho Libre!!! :mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

First time I saw T2 was in 70mm at the now-defunct Cinedome in Orange. Quite an experience seeing it on that deeply curved Cinerama screen!

One of those 70mm prints also wound up at the Galaxy Theatre in San Francisco. Both of their THX auditoriums showed T2 during the first run, one had a 70mm mag print, while the other had the 35mm CDS setup. I opted for the 70mm screening.

I saw T2 at the Cinerama Dome in CDS 70mm. I was completely blown away as the Cinerama Dome had the only full range surrounds I have ever heard. Bass was coming from everywhere, and it was clean as a whistle. The next day after seeing it I made an appointment with the theater manger for a tour of the dome. I just had to see what was behind the screen and what type of surrounds they used.

[GMichael]

Your thin-skinned defensiveness whenever someone disagrees with your "without a doubt" opinions (among other things) has gotten awfully reminiscent of our two-time banned wannabe "professional" DVD reviewer Lexmark3200. Is it just coincidental that you joined the site and started flooding it with threads the exact same month that he got banned? :skep:

I don't think it's Lexie. First, there are no CAP LETTERS. Second, his posts are not long enough. Third, Lexie liked me. This guy's first and only reply to me was that he hoped I would vanish and never post here again. (or something to that effect)

So although I do see the similarities, I don't think that they are the same guy.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Third, Lexie liked me. This guy's first and only reply to me was that he hoped I would vanish and never post here again. (or something to that effect)

.

No he didn't tell you that!!! Nobody picks on G :mad:

[superpanavision70mm]

What was the context in which I said that to you Gmichael? If you are going to bring it up it might be important to get the exact text exchange. I don't remember the incident.

[dean_martin]

Deano,
Tell me that you DIDN'T go see Nacho Libre!!! :mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

I was backed into a corner. One of my sons and his friends wanted to go to a hardcore concert and I didn't feel comfortable with any of them going to see a band called KillWhitneyDead that uses bloody images of mangled bodies to promote its music and shows (getting a myspace account was the best thing I ever did for keeping up with what's going on with the kids) so I had to come up with something. It turned out to be fun.

And believe it or not I did actually see The Spy Who Shagged Me (got the theater's movie poster because it was the last night) and When Nature Calls and thought they were better than their first installments. (At least the Barney and Power Rangers days are long gone!)

[GMichael]

What was the context in which I said that to you Gmichael? If you are going to bring it up it might be important to get the exact text exchange. I don't remember the incident.

Here ya go. It's not word for word. But the feeling was the same. Post 15

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=17391

[Woochifer]

Oh I see, so now you have gone to the length of not just disagreeing with me about every petty thing that you can think of, but now you are trying to make the claim that I am some other person....that's pretty pathetic. I have been around the AR site for quite some time, but never crossed over to the actual forum part until more recently. I originally only posted in the photo gallery.

Nope, not claiming anything. Just noting some similarities in temperment and the "coincidental" timing of your appearance on this board just as Lex got banned. Either way, you're filling the role that Lex formerly occupied on the board rather nicely.

[Woochifer]

I don't think it's Lexie. First, there are no CAP LETTERS. Second, his posts are not long enough. Third, Lexie liked me. This guy's first and only reply to me was that he hoped I would vanish and never post here again. (or something to that effect)

So although I do see the similarities, I don't think that they are the same guy.

Well, if you look at this thread, they're starting to make their appearance. Maybe Lex cursed the board, and we've got a reincarnation in progress! :D

[Woochifer]

I saw T2 at the Cinerama Dome in CDS 70mm. I was completely blown away as the Cinerama Dome had the only full range surrounds I have ever heard. Bass was coming from everywhere, and it was clean as a whistle. The next day after seeing it I made an appointment with the theater manger for a tour of the dome. I just had to see what was behind the screen and what type of surrounds they used.

Interesting, because I'd never picked up on the range of the surrounds at the Dome's old sound setup (though I did notice how clean the bass was). I like watching movies there because they've always paid good attention to the presentation quality. But, until the recent renovation, I thought that the acoustics there were an issue. (Problem was worse at the Orange Cinedome, which had untreated wood domes for their two Cinerama auditoriums. I remember they used to roll out these giant EV horn speakers into the back of the theater for 70mm screenings)

I saw both Lawrence of Arabia and Apocalypse Now at the Dome, and those were absolutely spectacular on that Cinerama screen. Sometimes I think the Cinerama Dome would be better off as a repertory house, where they would put out a screening calendar and just roll classic films all the time.

[Kam]

I saw both Lawrence of Arabia and Apocalypse Now at the Dome, and those were absolutely spectacular on that Cinerama screen. Sometimes I think the Cinerama Dome would be better off as a repertory house, where they would put out a screening calendar and just roll classic films all the time.

they did that here in nyc at the Ziegfield. they showed a TON of classics like 2001, ET, aliens, lawrence, zhivago, the indiana jones trilogy, and many others in that dead time from feb-april. sad thing was, the theater was pretty empty throughout. no one really came out to support the movies.

[superpanavision70mm]

Someone has to keep the elitists in check.

[SlumpBuster]

Of course, all of this is purely academic as everyone knows the greatest sequel of all time is Debbie Does Dallas 2.

Your right that this is academic, but for the wrong reason (debbie 2). The greatest sequel is Army of Darkness. Why? Quotability. I probably quote Army of Darkness every other day. It has crept into my casual speech and thereby, my everyday life. T2 didn't do that.

[GMichael]

Someone has to keep the elitists in check.

For the record, I find your threads to be a lot of fun. Very creative.

Also,

T2: was a good movie. Great action. But T1 had more suspense for me. Every time you thought he was finally dead he got back up and kept coming. I'd have to rate them close to the same.

Same goes for Alien vs. Aliens. Both good movies. 2nd had more action. 1st had more suspense.

GF1 & GF2: Two was much better.
RW vs. 2: ditto

[superpanavision70mm]

ALIEN and ALIENS are almost like two radically different films. ALIEN is more of a Sci-Fi suspense film, while ALIENS goes for the more all-out Action w/ a bit of Horror to it. Then ALIENS3 turns more into a Horror/Suspense and ALIEN RESURRECTION goes for a more digital horror/action.

[kelsci]

T2 is a great sequel. I have scene it on pre-recorded tape and dvd. I also have the original laderdisc and the THX pan and scan laserdisc. I orginally found the videotape to be visually hard on my eyes to watch. The original laserdisc pressing was considered one of the best video quality laserdiscs produced. It is great. The FM analog sound is excellent while the digital sound is very good but that depends on your laserdisc player. The THX versions audio sounds exagerated on the midrange. I had vertical bars rolling on the THX version. The THX versions color had better correction than the original version. Grass had a bluish cast in the original version while being perfectly green in the THX version.

In the elevator scene in the mental hospital, there were many more nuances to the sound on the dvd as compared to the laserdiscs. I did not like the ex sound on the dvd.

Since I am a sort of a B type picture buff of a sort, I thought that FLASH GORDON'S TRIP TO MARS was a great sequel to the orginal FLASH GORDON film. I do find some "flaws" in the 2nd film as it relates to the first, but they are not too major. The third edition FLASH GORDON CONQUERS THE UNIVERSE does not connect as well as it should to the first two films, but stands well enough on its own merit.

FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is certainly a sequel to DR NO. The character of Dr. No. is mentioned by Blofeld in FRWL. As far as a film goes, it is one class act and still looks great 44 years after I saw it. IMHO, one of the best films ever made.

I found the opinions made by the other AUDIOREVIEW members on this topic most interesting.

[Woochifer]

they did that here in nyc at the Ziegfield. they showed a TON of classics like 2001, ET, aliens, lawrence, zhivago, the indiana jones trilogy, and many others in that dead time from feb-april. sad thing was, the theater was pretty empty throughout. no one really came out to support the movies.

From what I understand, the Ziegfeld is often closed for weeks at a time during the slow season when not a lot of big budget blockbusters are coming out. It's also not in an ideal location. Sad to think though that Manhattan can't consistently support its last single-screen showcase theater. At least it will always have a role for premieres and special screenings, since there are no other suitable locations left in Manhattan. The Mann Village theater in Westwood where I saw Superman Returns last night is where the world premiere was held a few weeks ago. Even though there were only about 50 people in that 1,400 seat theater, they stay open every day of the year and have a full slate of screenings during the day as well (studio execs have been known to drop by for weekday matinees to check on audience reaction).

I guess L.A.'s different because it's more of a "company town" and the Cinerama Dome is right in the thick of things in Hollywood. Right before the Dome closed for renovation and the addition of the 12-screen Arclight complex a few years ago, they had a monthlong festival where they rolled out a whole bunch of the old 70mm roadshow prints. Those played to packed houses night after night.

After about close to two years of renovation work, the Dome reopened with a festival of the old three-reel Cinerama features, since part of the Dome renovation included refitting the two extra projection rooms needed for Cinerama. Those too played to sold out houses.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Interesting, because I'd never picked up on the range of the surrounds at the Dome's old sound setup (though I did notice how clean the bass was). I like watching movies there because they've always paid good attention to the presentation quality. But, until the recent renovation, I thought that the acoustics there were an issue. (Problem was worse at the Orange Cinedome, which had untreated wood domes for their two Cinerama auditoriums. I remember they used to roll out these giant EV horn speakers into the back of the theater for 70mm screenings)

I saw both Lawrence of Arabia and Apocalypse Now at the Dome, and those were absolutely spectacular on that Cinerama screen. Sometimes I think the Cinerama Dome would be better off as a repertory house, where they would put out a screening calendar and just roll classic films all the time.

I think the Cinerama Dome's acoustical problems really depended on where you sat in the auditorium. The further back from the front of the auditorium you sat, the more prone your were to hearing nasty echos and comb filtering.

I saw several classic movies in the Cinerama process after the Dome renovations. How the West was Won, Seven Wonders of the World, This is Cinerama, South Sea Adventure, and The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm. They looked and sounded great. And yes, every show I went to was packed

The Manns Village is also a very good theater though I found its sound system to be a bit heavy in the bass. One of the main things I notice about LA theaters is that they pay very close attention to the quality of their presentation. There just is no movie audience like you find in Los Angeles.

[Woochifer]

I think the Cinerama Dome's acoustical problems really depended on where you sat in the auditorium. The further back from the front of the auditorium you sat, the more prone your were to hearing nasty echos and comb filtering.

I saw several classic movies in the Cinerama process after the Dome renovations. How the West was Won, Seven Wonders of the World, This is Cinerama, South Sea Adventure, and The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm. They looked and sounded great. And yes, every show I went to was packed

The Manns Village is also a very good theater though I found its sound system to be a bit heavy in the bass. One of the main things I notice about LA theaters is that they pay very close attention to the quality of their presentation. There just is no movie audience like you find in Los Angeles.

Finally saw Cars (GREAT movie, which will probably see many repeat viewings) at the Arclight last night, and man you talk about attention to presentation quality! Last night was the first time I'd seen been to the multiplex auditoriums at the Arclight, and I must say this is the best multiplex theater I've ever been to.

It's not just the presentation quality, which was top notch (the surround imaging in particular sounds great, by far the best I've heard from a stadium seating auditorium), but how they take care of every other little detail. Reserved seating, double wide armrests, no advertising, extra legroom, no seats too close to the screen, outstanding customer service, bar service in the lobby, no late seating, live announcements telling patrons to shut off cellphones and to shut the hell up during the movie, a clean lobby design that doesn't look like it came out of a Vegas casino, and Hebrew National hot dogs at the concessions stands! Well worth the $11 price of admission for a movie experience that gets so many things right.

The Village theater is not nearly as bassy as before. That gigantic subwoofer enclosure that took up so much space at the front of the theater is now gone. Too bad, because I liked that pinned-to-the-seat sensation that the Village's old subwoofer array created! Even though the bass level was high when that sub array was in place, I never found it excessive because they never overexerted the subs. In a lot of other theaters, I will hear the subs clearly overworked and sometimes distorted, and way out of balance.

[bubslewis]

ALIEN and ALIENS are almost like two radically different films. ALIEN is more of a Sci-Fi suspense film, while ALIENS goes for the more all-out Action w/ a bit of Horror to it. Then ALIENS3 turns more into a Horror/Suspense and ALIEN RESURRECTION goes for a more digital horror/action.

Have to agree with you about ALIENS, although ROAD WARRIOR is up there close. Just two of the best sequels around. Funny thing is that I saw both of those sequels before I watched the first ones.

Any thoughts on any movies that could make for a great sequel but there hasn't been one?

[bubslewis]

Would remakes count here?

the original THE THING, a black and white sci-fi classic, was great. The remake of THE THING with Curt Russel, was just full of top notched nastiness.

Same movie title, same general theme, but totally different script, detail, and circumstances. Seems to me the remake would qualify as a sequel and get real high marks.

Bill

[GMichael]

How about the return of the return of the living dead. Two..

[superpanavision70mm]

First, remakes in this thread does NOT qualify as a sequel. Second, who is CURT Russell? Any relation to Kurt?