What's worse: sequels, remakes, or prequels?

[PhysicalMediaMaestro]

Lots of people hate movie sequels. Lots of people hate movie remakes. Some people hate movie prequels. Which is worse? Please vote and let me know. Feel free to explain why if you like. Have a nice day.

[Deadend45]

Remakes really stink.

[Cruel Angel]

Remakes. Only rarely do they hit as well or surpass the original.

[Alan T]

Remakes

[Michael11]

Remakes.

[drush9999]

If a film is an absolute classic then a remake almost always sucks. Sometimes it works better like The Thing (1982). I hate prequels and retrospective "origin stories" in general, utterly pointless and lazy. Move forward with sequels.

[russweiss1]

In general, remakes tend to be lesser than the originals. This should be expected as studios don't typically remake crappy movies.

[formula_nebula]

Too many bad remakes.

[SelwynMcGinty]

Prequels are particularly lazy pieces of work - at least with remakes or sequels, there's at least a chance of putting a different twist on the source material.

The storytelling of prequels is almost guaranteed to be a dud. One notable exception is The Godfather Part II, which miraculously pulled off being an engaging prequel & sequel at the same time.

[djzero]

Remakes

[drb999]

It depends. They are all different but probably remakes come out the worst.

[PhysicalMediaMaestro]

Originally Posted by Cruel Angel

Remakes. Only rarely do they hit as well or surpass the original.

If that's the case, wouldn't it make more sense just to re-release the original in theaters?

[PhysicalMediaMaestro]

Originally Posted by SelwynMcGinty

Prequels are particularly lazy pieces of work - at least with remakes or sequels, there's at least a chance of putting a different twist on the source material.

The storytelling of prequels is almost guaranteed to be a dud. One notable exception is The Godfather Part II, which miraculously pulled off being an engaging prequel & sequel at the same time.

Here's a question I have for you. The events in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" took place before the events of "Raiders of the Lost Ark". Does that make "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" a sequel, or a prequel?

[PhysicalMediaMaestro]

Originally Posted by russweiss1

In general, remakes tend to be lesser than the originals. This should be expected as studios don't typically remake crappy movies.

If they're bad movies, they could still remake them, but just give them different titles and make enough changes that only a small percentage of people connect the two.

[SelwynMcGinty]

Originally Posted by PhysicalMediaMaestro

Here's a question I have for you. The events in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" took place before the events of "Raiders of the Lost Ark". Does that make "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" a sequel, or a prequel?

Temple of Doom has been identified by its creators as a "standalone prequel", and quite a lousy one, as least to me.

[traths]

Remakes