Originals vs. Remakes: Which film franchises got it right?

Let me throw out some titles for you guys.

Terminator
Alien
Mad Max
Star Wars

I’d specifically highlight Alien. Do you guys agree that for this series, the sequels actually outdo the original? That’s incredibly rare. Usually, you get franchises where the first movie holds its own, but the follow-ups just fall flat. Take Scream, for example.
With Mad Max, the third one is honestly garbage, but the second one is the best in my opinion.
Aliens is totally peerless, whereas most other sequels feel like they're just milking the brand at this point.
Star Wars is genuinely good every single time, though looking back through today's lens of special effects, the original feels pretty naive.
Terminator 2: Judgment Day is definitely better than the first, even if I personally find the story in the original more compelling.

I'm curious—are there any other movies where you actually prefer the sequel over the original?
Also, there are those rare franchises where every single installment is interesting or even great. Take Halloween; the only time they really messed it up was with H2O.

Personally, I think Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets beats the first one any day... 🙂
I actually prefer Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade over the original, too, but I have zero interest in ever sitting through the second one again. 😁
For me, The Godfather remains the absolute king, even if pretty much everyone else I know thinks the sequel is better.

To me, Aliens is easily the second worst in that franchise. Honestly, the movie is such an absolute mess that I struggle to understand how anyone could actually enjoy it. It’s pure nonsense. And don't even get me started on Alien 4—that one is just as bad, if not worse.
Terminator 2 is definitely superior to the first installment; we'll have to see if they can pull it off with the third part.
For me, Mad Max is the clear winner with the sequel, though the original holds up quite well.
I think all the Star Wars films are great, but A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back still stand in a league of their own.
As for The Godfather, I can't really fault them; they're all high quality. 🙂
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is a disaster, while the third one is fantastic and the original is perfectly solid. 🙂
Regarding Harry Potter, there is simply no way it could ever be worse than the first one.

What about Star Trek, for instance?
Here is my personal ranking for the Star Trek films:
The Wrath of Khan (II)
The Undiscovered Country and First Contact (I can't decide between these two) (VI, VIII)
The Motion Picture (I)
The Voyage Home (IV)
The Insurrection (how do you spell that again???) (IX)
The Search for Spock (III)
The Final Frontier (V)
Generations (VII)

What are your thoughts? (The numbers in parentheses indicate the chronological order of the films)

I don't think the title of this thread is the best fit, but honestly, it doesn't matter much.

Usually, studios just churn out sequels if the first movie was a hit or made a killing at the box office. It’s pretty standard to expect a sequel to be a letdown since they're mostly just trying to squeeze more cash out of last year's hype.
That said, some films actually manage to keep the quality of the original intact. I'd point to The Godfather Part II as a prime example.
As for Star Wars? Every single sequel feels like an exponential slide toward zero.
Personally, I think The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and III will match the quality of the first one, simply because they were filmed all at once.
But movies like Rambo and Best of the Best aren't even worth watching—let alone discussing.

frozentiger6 said:Let me throw out some titles for the list.

Terminator
Alien
Mad Max
Star Wars

I would specifically point to Alien. Do you all agree that in these franchises, the sequels actually surpass the original? It is a genuine rarity. We often see series where the first installment holds its own, but the follow-ups fall flat. Take Scream, for example.
In Mad Max, the third part is truly an insult, though the second one is, in my view, the best.
Aliens is unparalleled, whereas most other sequels are just classic cash grabs.
Star Wars is, admittedly, good in every installment, yet from today's perspective regarding special effects, the first part feels somewhat naive.
Terminator 2: Judgment Day is certainly better than the first, although I find myself more drawn to the story in the original.

I am curious if there are any other films where you prefer the sequel over the original.
And another thing—there are series where every single sequel is interesting or even excellent. Take Halloween; they only completely botched it with H2O.

I should merely note: Aliens is not better than Alien. Both are good—each in its own way, because they represent two distinct directorial styles:

Ridley Scott focused on an atmospheric, dreamlike, and horrific mood, leaning into ambiguity and psychological impact on the viewer.

James Cameron crafted a massive action spectacle, brimming with opulence (I refer to James Cameron as a representative of Hollywood Baroque) and focused on messages outside the human subconscious.

Similarly, Terminator 2 is not "better" than Terminator, because we are looking at different creative phases of a single director. By the time Cameron was filming Terminator 2, he was already deep into his baroque phase (The Abyss, Aliens), possessing plenty of money in his pocket and a keen understanding of the market demand for Arnold Schwarzenegger and his role as an action savior. Action, action, action, overflowing with extravagance and phenomenal scenes—that is Terminator 2. It simply does not belong in the same category as the emotionally driven Terminator...

Regarding Star Wars: since I consider Star Wars to be a myth rather than just a film, in terms of quality, all five filmed parts are absolutely indistinguishable to me.

As for Indiana Jones, I like the third one—Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade—the most.

With Back to the Future, the first one is definitely the strongest, though they maintained consistency through the second and third.

Aliens is a standalone masterpiece, while every other sequel is just blatant cash-grabbing.

Are you actually serious right now?
For me, the second installment is easily the worst one, right after the fourth, of course.
Like someone else already pointed out, it’s nothing more than typical action-movie filler!

The original Alien is definitely the peak. After that, you've got Fincher's Alien III—which honestly would have been a perfect way to wrap up the series—but then they completely botched it with the fourth one.

For some strange reason, I actually prefer Terminator 2: Judgment Day over the original.

I didn't enjoy Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade nearly as much as the other sequels.

And if I can add my two cents regarding The Exorcist I, II, and III...
After producing a true masterpiece like the first one, making such garbage sequels is practically a sin.

Timothy Cox2 basically just laid it all out there for me. Like, word for word. I’m not even trying to parrot him, I just genuinely feel exactly the same way about this.

Are you telling me there actually exist Exorcist II and III?
I honestly had no idea 🙄

Hm... first off, for me, Alien was the best one. Maybe it's because everything was kept hidden and just felt so eerie. That internal sense of dread it builds up inside you—at least for me—was most effective in that movie. The other films are creepy, scary, gross (not saying that in a bad way)... and we see all of it. In the first one, so much is left to the imagination, and let's be real, your own mind is the best director in the world.

I’d rather not even comment on Star Wars. I watch them as a whole series, and personally, I don't like picking them apart individually. The original trilogy is pure fantasy to me, which makes sense since I grew up with them. I used to say Return of the Jedi was the worst, but I don't think that anymore. I mean, what about the part where Darth Vader turns good? Episode I is the worst for everyone, but to me, it's just another chapter in my favorite saga. Every series has its hits and misses. As for Episode II... yeah, I'm not going there right now.

Personally, I'm a huge fan of the first Indiana Jones, but the third one has Sean Connery in it.

Terminator 2 is way better for me, simply because James Cameron did such a killer job building tension throughout the entire film. Some of the effects in the first one might look a bit naive by today's standards. But come on, admit it, we all love watching Arnold as the hero.😉

And don't even get me started on the James Bond sequels.😁 😁 😁

I’ve reached the conclusion that if those Aliens were stuck in a quartet, they’d dehydrate their entire lives away in about four minutes. Has anyone else noticed how the slime actually pours off them—not just slides, but literally pours?

I actually really dig Alien 3

The Godfather Part II is still better than the first one for me, though pretty much everyone I know thinks the sequel actually tops the original.

Wait, what? You're telling me a sequel could possibly outshine Vito Corleone? Or even beat out what I’d argue is the greatest opening sequence in cinema history? ("I Believe in America"—honestly, I'm speechless!) No way in hell.

Sequels are usually garbage, easy as that. Most of them are total trash. I mean, the Star Wars films didn't completely butcher the legacy—though I can't quite remember who else helped mess things up 🙂

Hold on, what about Psycho? 🙂))

Psycho
Is this more along the lines of what you had in mind?

Look, let’s get one thing straight: for me, the original Alien was the absolute peak of the franchise. Why? Because it actually knew how to build tension. It relied on what you *couldn't* see. That suffocating, eerie atmosphere it creates stays under your skin far longer than any jump scare ever could. Sure, the sequels are creepy, intense, and gross—and look, I don't mind the gore—but they show you everything on a silver platter. In the first film, so much was left to the shadows. And let's face it: your own imagination is the best director in the business.

I couldn't agree more.

Why on earth do sequels like *The Exorcist II* and *III* even exist? Seriously, what was the logic there?

They exist.

Is there anything more iconic than this? We’re looking at a true pillar of cinema here. When you sit down to watch a masterpiece like this, you aren't just watching a movie; you're witnessing history. Does it hold up? Absolutely. It doesn't just meet expectations—it defines them. Some people try to overanalyze the pacing or question the structure, but they miss the point entirely. Why complicate perfection? The direction is flawless. The tension is palpable. It’s a masterclass in storytelling that most modern blockbusters can only dream of achieving. Can we finally stop pretending that everything released today is groundbreaking? This is what real filmmaking looks like.

Check this out: http://us.imdb.com/Title?0099528

Honestly? You’re better off not knowing.

So I just caught wind that they’re actually filming

The Exorcist: The Beginning

http://us.imdb.com/Title?0204313

Nancy Roberts5 said:Are you actually kidding me right now?
For me, the second one is easily the worst, right after the fourth, obviously.
Like someone already pointed out, it’s just the usual mindless action filler.

Man... they mostly show up at night... most of the time. 😛

Evil Dead II 🙏 🙏 🙏
Evil Dead II 🙏 🙏 🙏

Aliens is just a straight-up adrenaline rush, a textbook action flick. Honestly, you could have swapped out those aliens for some rogue militia or even terrorists and the movie would’ve landed just as hard 🙂
For me, though, the third one is easily the best. It’s got that unmatched atmosphere. Those dark, claustrophobic tunnels, the shadows, a bunch of absolute psychos... plus, it features the most captivating Sigourney Weaver I've ever seen 🙂