The thing about the Puss in Boots 2 movie though, is that part of the reason it is beloved and successful is because it basically disregards the material of the previous movie apart from Kitty Softpaws, and focuses on just telling a fun new good story. It's designed in a way that doesn't require you to watch the previous movie or any of the Shrek movies to get a feel of who this character is or understand his appeal. In a way, it's not even really a sequel because it is hardly built off of what came before it.
@@katm8128 True, though they are essentially non-applicable to my point because they are built off of what predates them. Though you could say that they serve as adequate examples of good Dreamworks sequels, which I can assume is the reason you brought them up.
I'll give the Disney DVD sequels this: most new actors they signed on gave their all in their performances. The people who sounded disinterested were usually the ones from the originals.
The only animated Disney sequel I've ever liked was Rescuers Down Under, and it's a shame that it doesn't get remembered more often, because there's a lot of talent put into that one. And the Lion King sequels aren't that bad, but again Disney put more than a little effort into them and it shows.
Jeffrey Katzenberg is to blame for its underperformance at the boxoffice. All because the opening numbers couldnt reach what he wanted and he pulled the tv advertisement for it. Of course Home Alone being out too probably drew away a lot of its viewers too
@Thomasmemoryscentral as much as I enjoyed him poking fun at Michael Eisner in the first Shrek movie, he seems like the kind of guy who would bleed ice water if you cut him.
I'm sorry to say but rescuers down under is not a good sequel either. the villain is not as compelling as medusa, the boy doesn't even meet the two mice until the climax of the film(hence no relationship or connection is built between them) and there is no overall tension or excitement in trying to save cody because the setting is not as claustrophobic as the bayou from the first film
There's a couple like Bambi 2 which I know are nowhere on the same league as the original but are still a guilty pleasure for me due to LEGITIMATE EFFORT being put into them.
Okay, I have to say it. Her name's Vanellope, not Penelope. Also, I strongly disagree on the take on Lion King 2 not treading new ground with its characters. Simba's arc was one of my favorites in that film. He spends the whole time trying to be Mufasa without realizing what made Mufasa a great king. It's called "Simba's Pride," which is a double entendré. On the one hand, it's talking about the pride of lions he leads. On the other, it's referring to his pride as he esteems his people above the Outlanders. Plus, Zira's a fantastic villain in her own right, preferring a much more deranged approach over Scar's more methodical technique. Now, admittedly Kiara's not the most compelling protagonist, especially up against Simba and Kovu, but the rest of the story makes up for it. Besides, it definitely doesn't follow the first film beat for beat, unlike Little Mermaid 2 which was basically a retread of what came before.
I don’t know about you but I think the Lion Guard episode that featured Zira, Kovu, Nuka and Vitani pretty much had better exposition and backstory on who they were and why they were banished by Simba compared to the 2nd film which just have them appeared all of a sudden being as "former followers of Scar" before Simba banished them through mention and context without exposition considering in the original _Lion King_ film we didn’t see *ANY* Lionesses siding and being loyal with Scar.
Actually, The Little Mermaid 2 may have had a similar premise as the first movie, but it did have a lot of things that made it different despite the annoying reliance on visual callbacks. TLM 1 was a romance fantasy while TLM 2 was a coming-of-age journey. The movie was more about Melody, a girl who suffers from social anxiety disorder, self-loathing and lacks self-esteem, learning to accept herself if she wants to be accepted and that becoming a mermaid doesn't change who she is. The movie is also about Ariel learning to be a better mother. Her relationship with Melody was rough because she never had a mother figure of her own and became a mother at a young age. That combined with the trauma of Melody being almost devoured before her eyes made it harder for her to prioritize her happiness over her safety. Hence her character growth is learning that she can't protect Melody 100%, all she can do is her best. The movie also emphasizes on how everyone has grown since the last movie rather than just going the Hunchback II route where the characters are just there. Ariel has grown into a sophisticated, mature and elegant queen, Eric has grown into a confident man who has embraced responsibility and has become more playful as a husband and a father and then there's Triton who is much warmer and more emotionally stable than in the last film.
I love 2nd TLK, it's was my favorite TLK movie in the childhood and it's now. I mean the first one is great and it's classic but I still love Simba's Pride more. Zira is a great villain and her song is like a little child of classic "be prepared" hehe Also Kiara literally had in her song line about her being not the smartest nor strongest
Given that Lion Guard became a thing and you see Kiara and Kovu, yes, people in Disney remember Lion King 2. Also Simba himself also had an arc during that movie...
I will defend the Aladdin sequels that at least they continued the story in a fairly organic way. Jafar and Iago were explicly NOT killed off so the chance they could return was left on the table. Aladdin's story was mostly told in the 1st movie, so focussing more on the less developed characters made sense. Plus we see what a Genie!Jafar can really do and he's great as a villain who has to work within the restrictions of being a Genie. He's able to manipulate Iago and Abis Mal despite being unable to kill, he shows his cunning and vindictiveness. Iago gets a redemption arc and the ending leaves the window open for more adventures. The 3rd movie is a good way to close the story out, Aladdin and Jasmine finally get married, we get to meet Aladdin's father, and the baggage that comes with it. The villains are fun, if not up to par with Jafar. We get some cool lore and worldbuilding, and action set pieces, and Aladdin's loyalties are tested as he has to deal with his father being the King of Thieves. Do they measure up to the 1st movie? No, but at least you don't feel like the story is just repeating itself as many poorly written sequels tend to.
I agree completely out of all of Disney's terrible sequels Return of Jafar and King of Thieves were easily the best were they better than the first Aladdin of course not but they were still very enjoyable and kicked off the great Aladdin series and brought Iago back as a main character.
At least the Lilo & Stitch sequels and tv series actually left an impact on the franchise, like characters Hamsterviel and some of the experiments like Reuben, Sparky, Angel, Sample, Felix and 627 have appeared at the parks, some of them get merchandise (Angel in particular get the most attention in that department and recently there’s a Reuben Funko Pop! and a Leroy plush with sound), even Lilo & Stitch 2 has plenty of memorable Stitch moments that got turned into merchandise like Stitch in his footy pajamas for example. Heck, even an obscure experiment like Splodyhead got a brief cameo in Big Hero 6 as one of Fred’s pillows. So yeah, out of all the Disney sequels, the Lilo & Stitch ones are some of the most notable ones in terms of a lasting impact and expanding the lore of it’s universe in a meaningful way by introducing the concept of 625 experiments created before Stitch.
Thank you for mentioning this! I think as far sequels/extended universes go, Lilo and Stitch was one of the most successful attempts at it. As different as the tone and direction was, it stayed in-character to the source material's themes. Things like Lilo and Stitch 2 and the series keep that theme of Ohana and family the main focus. Elements in the series are still embraced.
@@CatMario100 I couldn’t agree more. BTW, coming this spring, I’m creating a brand-new fansite dedicated to the franchise called Super Experiment Ohana. It’s going to be fun.
Rescuers Down Under is probably the best in terms of ani aged theatrical ones. They throw Bernard and Bianca into Australia across the world, Cody is the new kid in danger in a more dangerous area than a bayou, George C Scott playing the poacher poses more of a threat above Medusa and Jake the new anthro character is a long lasting effect on fanart
I think people do remember Kiara as Simba's daughter because she appeared in the Disney Junior show "The Lion Guard" which also introduced her little brother, Kion. So, that means her movie actually is memorable for Disney to flesh out her character in the series. I mean, I sure do love that movie as a child. As for the Little Mermaid 2, I agree that the plot is generic but Melody is beloved as a character (she's probably the only good thing in the movie). As for the other sequels, I wouldn't remember much if they weren't mentioned so yeah, Disney needs to take notes from Dreamworks on how to make a sequel
You mentioned that these sequels mostly felt pointless because the plots and arcs of the original movies were neatly tied up. I remember saying to myself when Shrek 2 was announced "What could they possibly do for a sequel?" and I was blown away at how good it was. So it got me thinking about why Dreamworks seems to know how to do sequels better than Disney; I think it's because Dreamworks is able to figure out what the next logical step in a character's story is, while Disney draws a blank.
Yeah I think Dreamworks is stronger when it comes to keep the continuity well and making sequels. Even their tv series adaptations are pretty good. Really got me thinking, Dreamworks is a better story teller than Disney.
Winnie the Pooh was the one film series that Disney repeatedly milked and yet struggled to truly ruin. The Tigger Movie and the 2011 main studio sequel in particular are almost as sweet and enjoyable as the original film. Heck even the TV shows like New Adventures are lovingly made.
I absolutely forgot that tigger movie is a sequel when thinking of good sequels. That movie was one of my favorites growing up could sing the music all day in front a tv ❤
I loved the first Wreck It Ralph, and I was so upset at how much they fumbled the ball with its sequel, especially because with a few tweaks, it would've actually been a really great film. I have no experience with writing a film, yet I have thought of a much better sequel than Walph Breaks My Patience: It has been a year since the events of the first film, and while she has friends and the sugar racers respect her, Vanellope is terrified that everyone would abandon her and isolate her like they did in the first film because of her glitch. One day, out of her control, she glitches, and it causes her game to crash and get shut down, and all the racers treat her like they did in the first film and insunuate that it would have been better if she was never developed in the first place. She escapes to Slaughter Race, and she befriends Shank, who takes advantage of her emotional vulnerability to take her code so that she can make all her competition get shut down or something. Ralph is the only one who notices and tries to get her to see that she is being manipulated, but Vanellope says otherwise, and this causes a rift in their friendship. Shank betrays her, and Ralph, Felix, Calhoun, and all the racers they babysat help free Vanellope and beat Shank. Is it perfect? Probably not, but at least it is better than what we actually got.
The idea of Shank being the main villain of Wreck-It Ralph 2 is very intriguing. And it would actually make more narrative sense. Also, I’d have used the movie to expand Ralph and Vanellope’s relationship into a father-daughter bond, given more screen time for Fix-It Felix and Calhoun, and WAY less ego-stroking/Self-merchandising on Disney’s behalf. But that’s just my opinion as a hobbyist writer.
Oh you got a better script there and the self sucking off Disney pulled there aged badly once more of the company’s dirty laundry came out. Remember them wanting to cheapen park experiences with instagram walls for photos? Did those come out?
Oh most WIR fans would agree with you. It was reasonably expected that the four main characters (Ralph, Vanellope, Felix, and Calhoun) would adventure together since they're a found family, and we'd get more development amongst them since some of them didn't get to interact much. Felix and Vanellope, Calhoun and Ralph, etc. That's the utter bare minimum of what can be expected of a sequel to a movie like this, and Disney still meddled it to death, since the actual crew did want those four to spend more time together (lots of unused storyboards, concept art, etc.). Disney chased off one of their best directors (Rich Moore) and ruined what could've been a great sequel, because they just absolutely had to remind everyone that they own a bunch of overmarketed characters who have no relevance to the Wreck-It Ralph franchise and show off that they know what the internet is.
@@fishdude2954 I was a huge fan of WIR until the second one come out. The reason? The idea of lively videogame characters inside the arcades with their rules and laws that conveyed through Ralph and Venellope's journey. But then they completely wiped out everything just for the sake of "internet". They intentionally breaking the forbidden rule in which was strictly alerted in the first place and creating another 'turbo' at ease.
Dreamworks is so much better than Disney and Pixar at making sequels. Shrek, Madagascar, How to Train Your Dragon, Kung Fu Panda, and the Croods. Even Trolls and Boss Baby have their fans and stayed true to their predecessors. Dreamworks wants to please its audience. Unlike so many creators who destroy franchises out of spite or try to ''fix'' them to their own liking, Dreamworks respects its audience, characters, and lore. I'm sure they know fans want more, but they only make a sequel if they know it will be great.
Then again for every How to Train Your Dragon 3 and Madagascar 3, you also had Shrek the Third and Kung Fu Panda 3 which have gotten a bad rep from fans and called them as inferior to its two respective predecessors.
@@mikhailabraham421 I think you misinterpreted what I said, I’m not one of those people who disliked Kung Fu Panda 3, it’s just that I notice that the majority say it was inferior to the 2nd film (the one where most fans continue to laud and say it’s better than the first film). Even the same can be said with Shrek the Third which most fans consider this film a giant step backwards to Shrek 2 and the first Shrek film.
Dreamworks has always been overshadowed by Disney, so they need to try actually pleasing fans and making stuff with quality, unlike Disney, who's philosophy is just "Use a name people know, and it'll sell." Plus Disney is continuously pushing its agendas, while Dreamworks is telling complex stories that everyone can agree with.
@@EChacon Kung Fu Panda 3 was a good film. It just couldn't match KFP1 or KFP2 with the much more comedic tone the producers wanted from it. But it still garners positive reviews to this day. Shrek the Third was a disaster, but that was because the main guy (Andrew Adamson) behind both Shrek 1 and Shrek 2 was poached to direct Narnia. They also lost most of the other screenwriters who worked on Shrek 2. Losing the people responsible for the story and plot is a pretty big hurdle to overcome. Which makes the utter failure of Ralph Breaks the Internet even more baffling. Between both the 1st and 2nd films, the main 3 people working on it remained the same: Rich Moore, Phil Johnston, and Jim Reardon. Normally getting everyone back together is a good sign that a sequel will be consistent with its predecessor, but Ralph Breaks the Internet took everything parameter set up in the 1st film and proceeded to have the main two characters break them. The dynamic between the two leads also changed so drastically to the point where both characters are unrecognizable. I don't understand how that film was botched so badly.
Lion King 2 remains one of the only Disney sequels I love, I can admit it's not nearly as good as the Lion King, but it remains near and dear to my heart.
Recent Disney and Pixar movies were rather underwhelming. Turning Red, Strange World and Lightyear lost money. The only movie made by these companies which most people don't hate or aren't completely indifferent to is Encanto. And there are already rumors of a sequel or a series, maybe both. Disney is now reusing the same strategy it used years ago. Release a bunch of sequels to their beloved movies to make money. Tired of live-action remakes? How about a continuation? Incredibles 2 (2018) Ralph Breaks the Internet (2018) Toy Story 4 (2019) Frozen 2 (2019) Do you know what they have in common? They were super rushed because we have to pump multiple movies every year including bout Pixar and Disney, Marvel, live-action remakes, and whatever else this monopoly swallowed. Let's not forget Disney+! They were in production hell. It's so obvious there was no plan for a continuation of so many of these projects. And even when there were because everything was so rushed nothing got properly developed and people just slapped everything together. They made a huge amount of money! In my personal opinion, original movies like Strange World, Raya and The Last Dragon, or The Good Dinosaur are less bad on the principle of not destroying already great characters. But they don't have the franchise recognition and the mentality of ''Sure the new movies are bad but this is the sequel to the classic. It must at least be somewhat good like its predecessor!'' Frozen 3 This is probably the most obvious of all as Frozen is Disney's most lucrative, overexposed, and overrated movie ever. The first Frozen isn't the best. It's not the worst thing ever but everybody agrees how overblown it was. The message about not isolating yourself but also not trusting blindly, the prince being the bad guy, and the familiar love being the answer instead of romantic love is noble and somewhat novel at the time, at least for Disney but they could've been executed better. Practically everyone and their mother has talked about how Hans is the worst twist villain and how his plan doesn't make any sense. And to those who want to see Hans back don't get your hopes up. Disney is way too proud of their subversive evil prince charming to walk back on it and redeem him. Besides, I have no idea what contrived reason would they have to come up with to bring him back. Frozen 2 tries to explain Elsa's power but makes everything more confusing. Characters are sidelined or assassinated. And it contradicts the message of the previous movie. I expect more of the same. More pretty clothes for Elsa and Anna so you buy new dolls for your kids. Pretty visuals and songs. Making fun of ''Let it go'' and Hans. Someone on here called Frozen the Minions of Disney and I couldn't agree more. Toy Story 5 I'm not breaking new ground by saying Toy Story should have ended with Toy Story 3. There already is a great video critiquing everything wrong with Toy Story 4 and I doubt that the 5th installment will fix the mistakes of its predecessor. Unless it will be worse and makes it look better by comparison. I expect more new toys with celebrity voice actors which only exist to sell more merchandise. And you thought Dreamworks was bad! At least most of their characters have a point to exist. Watch this guy’s video. It’s great. ruclips.net/video/U__oaZ9FiXM/видео.html Zootopia 2 This is the one I'm most concerned about. This one has the most potential I would love to see more of the wonderful city of Zootopia. But on the other hand, I can already see how it's going to be one of if not the worst and most controversial movies Disney will ever make. And I can't believe I'm saying this but it isn't exactly Disney's fault. I already saw people calling Zootopia cop propaganda and criticizing how it's handled racism. (I disagree but it's not the time for this conversation.) No matter on which political spectrum you are there are a lot of controversies surrounding the cops. Police brutality, the justice system not doing its job, and releasing criminals who already committed multiple felonies enabling them to terrorize innocent people, police acting like a militia for the elites and the new world order, stopping people from protesting in Hong Kong, Brazil, France, Denmark, and other countries. Those are very complicated and serious issues. It's not like they can't talk about it in a kid's movie but it has to be done in such a way so the kids understand. Also, it has to make sense within the context of the story, the setting, and the characters. I can't imagine Judy beating somebody up because ''all cops are evil'' or Zootopia suddenly having a pandemic and politicians using it to take away the citizens' rights. Also, with how incompetently Disney handled the very easy message of trust in Raya and the Last Dragon, or how in Incredibles 2 people would spit out random messages that never get any development and have nothing to do with the story, and how out of touch they are about the internet in Ralph Breaks the Internet, I don't trust Disney with telling me how to tie my shoes. Remember how Zootopia has a very interesting and logical mystery story? I think it's already established how modern Disney can't write, so expect there not to be any mystery whatsoever, with characters acting stupid and mean for the sake of the plot. I half expect them to split the characters at the end of the movie for a stupid reason. They've done it in Ralph Breaks the in Internet, Frozen 2, and Toy Story 4. The other part of me thinks they're not going to do it because the Nick and Judy shippers will go insane if that happens. But don't expect them to get together. Disney is saving it for Zootopia 3 or the Zootopia series. Besides they don't have the guts to make it canon.
@@henrythef1guy768 I don't care for Rotten Tomatoes. We know that critics are giving good reviews when they are paid. And many audience scores are given right after the viewing. But then you look back at the movie and see how bad it is or don't because you completely forgot you even saw it. Also, not everybody leaves reviews and scores.
Ok, while I’m used to the criticisms of the characters splitting up element in both Ralph Breaks the Internet and Toy Story 4, but don’t call Elsa and Anna splitting up stupid. Elsa at least had a legit reason to leave her kingdom and move in among the Antahollan people in the Enchanted Forest since she was destined to be the guardian of both the Elemental Spirits and Antahollans and is fulfilling her duty keeping connections with both and that both relationships with the Elemental Spirits and the Antahollan tribe are in perfect and harmonious balance. Plus, she still has her familiar connection with her sister and royal connection to her kingdom to still visit both her sister and people and participate in family bonding like playing games with her sister, so she didn’t entirely abandon her kingdom and her family. So what it boils down to is you’re basically mad at Elsa for just doing her duty when your complaint of Elsa leaving is INVALID. I can understand feeling upset about the split ups in RBTI and TS4 because I can see some valid reasons, but Frozen 2’s split up is not even on the same level as those 2.
@@hunterolaughlin This! Also so many people say Frozen 2’s message contradicts the first…except Elsa is merely setting up heathy boundaries while Anna is so clingy that SHE’S the one shutting out everyone else in her life without a second thought just to be by Elsa’s side 24/7.
A gut feeling told me to pass on Ralph Breaks The Internet blursy and it's likely because the licensing drew me in but it's not worth it for home media
@@briamari9035 i honestly disagree the emoji movie to me is just mediocre mush with some lame "how do u do fellow kids!" type of humor the type of movie you remember absolutely nothing about rbti is awful and just promotion material it's basically disney just saying "LOOK AT ALL THE PROPERTIES WE OWN" which i guess you can argue the emoji movie did too, but rbti just ruined the characters. turned vanellope selfish and ralph into a big man baby vanellope literally did what the villain from the first movie did which is.. yeah this is just my opinion lol
@@curepinkie1637 no you right. That's the reason I hate rbti. If john lasseter was there that would never happen. The emoji movie isn't really a movie that I hate with all my guts and soul tho.
I mean lion king 2 and 1 1/2 are Disneys best sequels in my opinion, the animation didn’t look like crap, especially in 1 1/2, where the animation almost looks almost identical to the original.
The Little Mermaid 2 is not a good movie, I admit. BUT Melody is a genuinely well written character. She goes through actual character development, her characterization and design make her a unique character from Ariel and she feels more multi-layered than Ariel herself. As for The Jungle Book 2, it suffers from the same narrative problems as Return to the Sea, but at least they gave Mowgli character development and gave a lot of depth to Mowgli and Shanti's relationship, such as how they learn from each other, improve each other and complete each other.
I totally agree with you. No wonder Melody is Tara Strong's personal favorite character. And she would have been a memorable character if her story had been 100% original with a different villain like a group of skeleton pirates, or a leviathan instead of a cheap Ursula clone.
@@aidanhever3369 It's about a half mermaid named Emily who has a human mother and a merman father. The father was sent to prison because relationships between Merpeople and humans are illegal. Once Emily comes of age she discovers the ability to grow a tail when ever she's wet. Her goal in the first book is to save her father. The Little Mermaid 2 sadly feels rushed and overly simplified by comparison. Like you said the one great thing is that Melody is such a wonderful character, but now that Tara Strong played Twilight from Ponies, that redeeming factor is now gone.
The first Wreck it Ralph had so much conflict like Ralph trying to win a medal in another game, Vanellope wanting to race, Felix trying to bring Ralph back to his game before it goes out of order & Calhoun trying to destroy all cybugs before they take over every game in the arcade. Ralph Breaks the Internet was just fanservice with Disney characters like Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh & the Disney princesses.
Hey, at least we got to see all the Disney Princesses together for the first time and not just in a fan art or fan fiction. Although, maybe that scene can just exist as a short film apart from the film and still work. 🤷♂️
@@hunterolaughlin true. Vanellope meeting the Disney princesses was fun and entertaining. However you know what would have been more interesting: if Ralph meet the Disney VILLAINS. The first movie was about Ralph not wanting to be the bad guy anymore and wanting to be a good guy, but was told he couldn't change who he was. So Ralph meeting the Disney villains would make Ralph to teach the villains that they can become good guys.
When it comes to the Disney sequels including it’s direct-to-video sequels (sequels, prequels, midequels), the ones I consider the best sequels in my personal opinion, are _The Rescuers Down Under, Aladdin: The Return of Jafar, Aladdin and the King of Thieves, Fantasia 2000, The Jungle Book 2, The Lion King 2, The Lion King ½, Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp’s Adventure, Bambi II, Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch, Stitch the Movie, Leroy and Stitch, Cinderella 3: A Twist in Time, The Little Mermaid 2, The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning,_ and _Return to Neverland_
At the very least, the aladdin sequels made sense in a story fashion, Jafar returns and gets defeated, the cartoon takes place and ends with the third movie with his dad, the king of thieves, so i think it wraps it up neatly.
"Hollywood did this a lot. If a picture made money, they would immediately come back with a sequel, but somehow they never seem to be able to realize what it was that made the first one good" - Ronald Reagan
This is why i love good series.(see buzz light-year of star command, big hero6 the series, or the tangled series)They go the borderline slice of life stuff that let's the Characters exist without forcing a bunch of out of character stuff. Wreck it Ralph was built for a series but now all that potential is ruined.
I agree with you as a whole about the Disney dvd sequels, but I would include Lion King 2 as up there in quality. I feel like they really captured Scar's manipulative personality in Zera's plan. Pretending to get in good with Simba and Kiara so he can eventually assasinate him. She felt genuinely threatening even when the lionesses turn on her at the end because Zera tries to take out Kiara. Personal stakes. Just my opinion
The main reason why the movies always fail is bad world building. Because both they wanna try to maintain some familiarity so they're afraid to explore deeper across the world at the same time they also forget what made first one great thus being anti world Building. It's the reason why the shows like aladdin lilo and stitch Tangled big hero six always do great because the show is not afraid to worlbuilding and focus on lesser known characters. Not to mention they all have one question their answering. Who are the other experiments? Are there other magical things of the genies in this world? What's the kingdom of Corona And if there's a sun flower is there moon flower
This is generally what I've been saying for years...what makes a good sequel is that there's a nugget of information from the first can expand what we know about this world and these characters in a sequel. Worldbuilding. But that requires a HUGE awareness of what can expanded on in the first place and making damn sure a sequel can work around/within that. Finding Dory is a perfect example of this. Not that it's perfect sequel, but it follows that rule of thumb generally well. A Dory centered sequel was the ONLY thing that made any sense. It expands on a character people loved already and were curious about, and added to the world we know, even if imperfectly. Most of these sequels don't add a damn thing to the universe of the original, so they fall flat as hell or make no sense at all. Frozen had potential for good sequel but they decided to be ridiculous, go cash cow and squander that opportunity. Now we're stuck with a seemingly endless loop of awful sequels and live actions.
It's possible that DreamWorks Sequel have better Writers, and understanding the Characters very well, plus they created the Storyline differently. Reason why Disney Sequels don't do good is because they keep the repeating the same storyline.
Love how Disney were so desperete to have everyone forget about melody they didn’t even include her in their ever after high rip off franchize where the focus is all about Disney princesses and villains having kids
I do think Lion King 2 is good based on the fact that it basically adapts a Shakespeare story like the first movie. Just replace "Hamlet" with "Romero and Juliet."
I agree with you mostly but I won't stand for this Lion King 2 slander. One of the few sequels that had a plot and theme that tied to the first movie. Plus the animation quality was pretty good.
I hate being nit picky but Kiara was in the Disney Jr. Series “The Lion Guard”. Hell Season 3 of that show literally exists to explain where Kion was during the events of Lion King 2.
9:33 I know that the literally movie is Ralph being attached to a 9 year old BUT literally think about the underlying cause of why he’s doing it and what he’s representing. To me, Ralph is representing someone who found a new sense of living/being bc of someone new and now that “someone new” is going off to do new and even better things in their life but Ralph is like nooo wait i still wanna be by your side with whatever you do and Vanellope is saying “oof i want to do this new thing, but what about Ralph? He’s gonna be so sad if i leave and do my own thing” (literally in her song: “A Place Called Slaughter Race”).
@@briamari9035 i don’t really think Disney is pushing that to the side, i think they’re just saying that’s her own choice, she knows the consequences. I don’t remember Puss in Boots 2 bringing up the egg 🤷🏽♂️
It's worse than that. Going Turbo is basically considered the worst crime imaginable in the wreck it Ralph universe not just because it puts you at risk of dying but because it also puts everyone else from the game that you both came from and go to at serious risk of becoming homeless and dying. It's been a while since I saw the movie but I don't think Venelople can respawn in Slaughter Race. A game like that most likely has the characters dying and respawning all the time there's no way she would last long, even if she took input away from the player to avoid crashes, she most likely would be "fixed" in a patch which wouldn't end up well for her. On the other side Sugar Rush is an old game that already had to have one if it's parts replaced, combined with the fact that Venelople was stated to be the most popular character do you honestly think Sugar Rush would last much longer? So basically everyone is screwed
I don’t think The Lion King 2 is a bad movie, actually. It’s clear they put a lot of effort into it, and while it’s obviously that no one could ever top the original, they still did a pretty good job. I think, had they added two scene just to flesh out some characters on the side (and re-added that insane original villain death scene), it could’ve easily been on the same standard of some higher revered Disney original films-rather than just a generally good Disney film; and a great sequel.
The main reason is because Disney defecates on the concept of creative freedom for sequels, even theatrical ones. They still work from a playbook from the 1950s in terms of what they think audiences want. In some cases at least, no, the sequels aren't bad because "the narrative wrapped up in the first movie". That would necessitate a Part 2 of the same movie, not a full sequel. Look at Toy Story - that movie didn't have a cliffhanger and yet it has at least 2 good sequels because the characters and world are very rich for further development. Wreck-It Ralph for instance is an awesome movie, with fantastic potential to be a series up there with Toy Story - great found family of characters, infinite story potential, and a crew of people who genuinely enjoyed making it and had tons of unused ideas stocked up for more material. But the "sequel" threw away the entire plot of half the main cast at the last minute and reduced them to offscreen babysitting instead of being on the adventure, and made everyone else look like out-of-character idiots - especially Ralph and Vanellope (her name isn't Penelope, come on, it's been 10 damn years so please at least do a 5 second Google search) - to justify the plot. Even the new characters barely got to do anything, and the forced irrelevant cameos and internet jokes took center stage. This certainly wasn't what the crew wanted - the director Rich Moore left Disney soon afterwards and even offhand mentioned creative freedom as a reason, plus the aforementioned other ideas the crew has revealed on their blogs and in concept art and such. It's easier for Disney to just keep churning out either low-effort "new" movies that are more alike to each other than creative sequels would be to their sources, or infinite side installments of princesses/Star Wars/anything else that's already been beaten into the ground, all while treating their workers like garbage. It's sad because it doesn't have to be this way, with all the money Disney has.
The goal of making a sequel is making it shine by itself. Something that won't make the audience go "oh I don't get the context, I better watch the first movie". In PIB: the last wish, they made a brand new original plot that wouldn't confuse their viewers. You didn't even need to watch the first movie to understand that Puss and Kitty were ex lovers. They also didn't mention humpty because they only focus on the characters that are relevant to the sequel
Can you do why Dreamworks sequels don't suck? Mainly because i wanna see the contrast between disney and dreamworks when it comes to thier sequel quality
bro Lion king 2 expands concepts of the original movie as well as continuing that universe in a logical way (also lion king 2 stuff was continued in the tv show that came out decades later but anyway) sorry I cannot agree that lion king 2 is worthless, it's a genuinely great movie that has it's own ground to stand on and a ton of banger songs
No it doesn't. The outsiders made no sense at all. We get no explanation of how they formed of where they were in the events of the original. Never explained why Scar chose Kovu as his successor or why he would even are for one. Simba is a bigoted and gullible asshole. Many of the songs are just rehashes of the original: He lives in you-Circle of Life Lullaby-Be Prepared Love will find a way-Can you feel the love tonight? LK2 is pretty bad and unfaithful
Counter point, melody in little mermaid 2 is often cosplayed in the mermaid community and the lion king sequels (mostly number 2) are referenced in lion guard. Some of the direct to dvd s equals do have some impact when in the right circumstances. Hell while Cinderella 2 is a cash grab, number 3 is a hidden gem of what should be an insane modern retelling of the original 1950s classic using time travel that no other Cinderella retelling has ever tried.
I need to say you did reference when some of the sequels were good. But most are just plain bland to the point of making chicken little more entertaining.
The worst thing about the alleged sequel to *Wreck-It Ralph* is that it almost makes King Candy look like he knows what he’s talking about in the original film. Vanellope had the chance to handle responsibility, and she blew it! But instead of blaming her for abandoning her people, the movie blames Ralph for being too needy as he becomes a phenomenon on a ludicrously inaccurate, instantly outdated, thoroughly boomerized ersatz version of the Internet.
maybe because unlike the original it aged wayyy better. like it didnt feature the absurd racial stereotypes of indigenous people, jane was a really good and well written protagonist, it wasnt really misogynistic to its female characters like making tinker bell a crazy psycho who was trying to kill wendy bc she was jealous of her while peter pan keeps treating her like shit, or making wendy (a child) fill a sweet and nurturing mother role that a child like her shouldnt be taking at all, and in the end it actually brought some closure to peter and wendy's relationship in a satisfying way. peter saw that wendy grew up and was dissapointed in her because he thinks all adults are terrible, but wendy, despite being an adult, never stopped believing in neverland and magic, despite the horrible things that were going on in the world. she showed him that she never abandoned her inner child.
regarding Wendy, in the time the story was written, this was actually what was expected of girls her age, since she would have also married very early in life - so for her original time period Wendy was portrait quite right - it was considered age-appropriated behavior + the whole concept of childhood as we know it was just invented in the 19th century by the upper class, so even back then, the poorer you are the lesser the chance for you being a child, the concept as such wasn't even known by the lower classes
I'll admit that I put both the original and Return to Neverland in both C and D tier on my tier list, so neither of the movies aged very well, well at least for me.
For some reason, whenever Disney decides to do a sequel they give it to writers and producers and directors that don't care about the original movies. Especially since 2016. And that's what pisses me off the most; if you're going to continue the story with these beloved characters then you'd better keep them consistent and treat them with respect.
The Lion King sequel was good. The villain Zira was a great predecessor to the legendary villain Scar. Zira had her own pride of lionesses that totally were eating alive Simba's lionesses. This makes the Outsiders cannibals. Scar's hyenas were getting washed by the pridelanders
No it doesn't. The outsiders made no sense at all. We get no explanation of how they formed of where they were in the events of the original. Never explained why Scar chose Kovu as his successor or why he would even are for one. Simba is a bigoted and gullible asshole. Many of the songs are just rehashes of the original: He lives in you-Circle of Life Lullaby-Be Prepared Love will find a way-Can you feel the love tonight? LK2 is pretty bad and unfaithful
@@sarveshnathan7559 that's true. The Outsiders are labeled as a pride of lionesses who got banished for being loyal to Scar with Zira being their leader, but Zira her lionesses were never in the first movie. During Scar's rule, the lionesses in the pridelands didn't like Scar's rule & when Simba came back, they sided with Simba. The only animals that supported Scar until he betrayed them were the hyenas. And the hyenas didn't appear in the second movie.
@@joshualowe959 So yeah, it makes no sense that there are a band of lionesses loyal to Scar considering all of them fought against him in the original movie and how everyone saw him as a terrible ruler, even the hyenas.
@@sarveshnathan7559 the only lioness who would still be loyal to Scar no matter what would be Zira and she was not itln the first movie either. Then there's the Lion Guard where a new generation of hyenas, Janja & his clan, along with Ushari the snake decide to revive Scar as an evil fire spirit and they also recruited animals like jackals, crocodiles, vultures & lizards to create the "Army of Scar", HOWEVER the female hyena jasiri decided to create a hyena resistance to fight against Scar to help the Lion Guard. But during this time, Janja & his clan never thought about recruiting Zira & her pride. Zira would have been so happy to see Scar again. She even said that she & Scar were very close.
Whatever he's guilty of, I still feel a strong sense of gratitude to John Lasseter for stopping those abominable DTV sequels. And if he were still in place at Disney I really feel he'd try to stop those equally horrible live-action/CGI remakes we're being plagued with now.
The sequel to Wreck it Ralph destroying the point of the original film could have actually worked, and even doing so while respecting the original movie But that's not the timeline that we live in
A fundamental issue with the shortcomings of attempts to faithfully carry on iconic characters is that the people given the task may not necessarily have familiarised themselves with what the characters had had to endure in the first place. In addition, Walt Disney, being the ambitious person he was, was apparently very reserved about doing sequels, considering a film to be what it is and allowing himself thus to focus on a new project. Indeed most people in Walt's time could hardly have imagined just how far-reaching an impact a solid film could have on its audience - filmmakers even wondered in the midst of production their work would be guaranteed success at all, that they keep coming back to them because they enjoy the characters so much. It would be inevitable then that people would ask for more. When a good sequel is written, it's when the people who make it are aware of the characters while also appreciating what could be done with them moving forward. In my eye that's something that shouldn't be left to chance. Regards, Samuel Farris.
I have some odd feelings towards the sequels, particularly the Direct to Home Video / DVD ones long before 2011 Winnie the Pooh, Frozen 2, and the obnoxious abomination that is Ralph Breaks the Internet. While I haven't watch all of them considering I'd just take some people's word about them, but there are some that I personally like and enjoy. They're obviously not going to top the original by any means, but they make some, well I think, some decent effort for trying to expand on the franchises, whether or not it succeeds or not is up to you, but this is just me expressing from my point of view. The Aladdin and Lion King sequels are usually my personal examples when it comes to successful sequels. As a big fan of Aladdin, The King of Thieves is a great finale for the Aladdin series to see Aladdin and Jasmine not only get married, but also learn a little more of Aladdin's family tree and bring in one of the many elements from the stories of the 1001 Arabian Nights, like the 40 thieves. As for Return of Jafar, it's more of a guilty pleasure but is obviously not as good as King of Thieves given most of the songs are bland and forgettable, the animation is obviously tv quality, and there's too much focus on Iago compare to the main cast. Granted, Jafar is one my personal favorite villains it's interesting to see get his revenge on Aladdin and was very close to getting Aladdin killed. For the Lion King, Simba's Pride is a worthy follow up on the original as it's based on Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet. Zira is a more deadly villain compare to Scar as she wants blood rather then control of the land, and Kovu has an interesting character arc. 1 in a half is funny on some level but it's not quite as good as Simba's Pride. There are other successful sequel like Lilo and Stitch: Stitch has a Glitch, Beauty and the Beast Enchanted, and Atlantis Milo's Return as a guilty pleasure as I'm a HUGE fan of the original Atlantis the Lost Empire movie.
To be fair, they're still learning; Disnry Animation has only made 2 theatrical sequels. Plus "Into the Unknown" makes me SUPER sympathetic towards sequels during the production process.
While I agree that Disney largely pumps stuff out solely for profit, I disagree that a sequel needs to first be set up by the original. You should really think of Disney film series as episodic rather than a long-form story. It's SpongeBob, not a planned trilogy. If enough people ask for a sequel, even if the original already closed out the character arcs and plot lines, the writers must then come up with entirely new shit or go back and rehash what was already done. You can't expect a sequel to expand on or continue a story when that story was already complete. In the case of Disney, yes it's fan service and a big cash grab, but you should still go into the sequels as their own individual stand-alone stories, just like an episode of SpongeBob. However, Disney should probably leave enough things open in the originals to allow some wiggle room for sequels. That much is a fair criticism. Another fair criticism is that Dreamworks tends to do sequels better, but they probably also plan ahead whereas Disney seem to... NOT plan ahead.
Interesting. Then let me ask you, what do you think of Pocahontas 2? That’s my favourite DTV sequel because that actually had Pocahontas explore London, think about how much of her culture does she need to sacrifice for the greater good.
I heard Disney is planning to make a sequel to Zootopia and that title is Zootopia 2 when they make it they better not screw up no more twist villains the sequel has to be better than the first and I wonder will they use the same animation from the original, or go with a new animation style like puss in boots,the last wish did
the main character in the first Aladdin sequel isn't Aladdin, it's Jago - he goes through an arc and comes out on the other side hence why he was part of the team in the series, I also loved the fact that at the end of king of thieves, he leaves with Aladdin's father
I can understand why Disney doesn't want to throw another villain at the characters after they defeated the last one. But take a look at the Shrek franchise, Shrek 2 added a new villain and Puss in Boots 2 added three. These are considered to be some of the greatest sequels of all time as well. So why not just add a new villain?
One of my favorite movies is Zootopia. However, with the announcement of a sequel, and Disney's track record with sequels, I'm worried that one of my favorite worlds will be tarnished.
Its shit like this that has me worried about Zootopia 2. I REALLY VERY don't want it to end up like Wreck-It Ralph 2, Rio 2 and other terrible sequels.
I’m at the 6:15 mark rn but i wanna say something. I still do think that Ralph breaks the Internet is it’s a good movie it teaches you about how people can hold you back from doing your dreams so overall, I think Ralph two and frozen two are good movies.
I don't think the lack of a Villain is an inherent problem in a film. But it is weird that Disney has completely abandoned part of what was so iconic to their own formula. It's not the lack of villains in any one film. It's the lack of strong and distinctive antagonists in ANY of their animated films that stands out so much.
To be fair I loved return of Jafar when I was a child had the vhs tape and all that. Ot for me was one of the few sequels I really cherish as lion king and little mermaid sequels specially because the songs Edit: Comments just reminded me that tigger movie is a sequel of winnie the pooh and that movie is just wholesome ❤ I also remind now that lady and the tramp 2 was somewhat fun too Toy story was good on their sequels at least the first 2 then they really lost their north.
Lion King 1 1/2 is still a banger film I love to this very day. Yes it's not perfect and has a couple of plotholes if you were to actually merge this story with the original Lion King's story, but despite that, it's still a really fun movie. One that not only gave you a neat look at TLK1 from Timon and Pumbaa's perspective, but it also expands the universe in pretty interesting ways. Arguably way more than Simba's Pride. Lion King 2's an okay film, but it's not one I'm as thrilled by when compared to the original and 1 1/2. Mostly with the story and animation quality. The story is... fine. Not great, but it works okay enough as a continuation. The animation on the other hand is something I'm really not a fan of. Idk what it is about it, but there's just something about the dull and darker colors that give me deviantart vibes, and not the best kind either. If I was to judge the lion king sequels based solely on animation quality alone, then 1 1/2 easily takes the crown for best visuals. It's just way more vibrant and close to the original film's color palette (but maybe that's just 1 1/2 bias speaking). Also what was with some parts of the world calling it Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata? I know marketing works differently in other regions, but it's still a really stupid name that doesn't fit with the film's actually about. Even the US trailer poked fun at this by having Timon screw around with the logo.
Let’s have a friendly debate! I don’t know if this was covered in the video but it’s a topic I’ve been wanting to discuss for as long as there have been Disney sequels. So, are the sequels canon or not canon? Remember this is ALL sequels even the ones made by Pixar. Only one rule: no cherry picking. Other than that, let’s have some fun!
7:13 This never fails to make me laugh no matter how much I watch it- Cinderella 3 is one of the only sequels of a disney classic that I actually liked
I do like some of its sequels, but so many are movies I never even knew existed, such as Aladdin 2, and Moana 2, because surely they’d have made a sequel to a movie before they remade it in live action only 7 years later if it was that good…
Развлечения
Disney need to learn some things from Dreamwork’s like Shrek 2 and Puss n Boots Last wish for successful sequel.
Kfp2, httyd2
Zootopia 2 better easily be Disney’s best sequel. The first movie set the bar *very* high.
Same thing with the villain's like the last good (even if he is great in my opinion) was king candy from 2016 like 7 years ago
Actually Disney needs to accept DreamWorks and learn but they want to make new contact from old ips and movies
Wreck-It Ralph was released in 2012
The thing about the Puss in Boots 2 movie though, is that part of the reason it is beloved and successful is because it basically disregards the material of the previous movie apart from Kitty Softpaws, and focuses on just telling a fun new good story. It's designed in a way that doesn't require you to watch the previous movie or any of the Shrek movies to get a feel of who this character is or understand his appeal. In a way, it's not even really a sequel because it is hardly built off of what came before it.
That's a good point. While I watched the Shrek movies (1-3), I was able to follow the story of Puss in Boots 2 without watching the first one.
It was a smart idea tbh
The sequel to how to train your dragon and especially kung fu panda were fantastic though and built upon the previous ones
@@katm8128 True, though they are essentially non-applicable to my point because they are built off of what predates them. Though you could say that they serve as adequate examples of good Dreamworks sequels, which I can assume is the reason you brought them up.
I see Puss in Boots the last wish as less of a sequel and more of a soft reboot kinda like The Suicide Squad or Bumblebee
Zira was a fun villain with a great voice actress in The Lion King 2
I'll give the Disney DVD sequels this: most new actors they signed on gave their all in their performances. The people who sounded disinterested were usually the ones from the originals.
The only animated Disney sequel I've ever liked was Rescuers Down Under, and it's a shame that it doesn't get remembered more often, because there's a lot of talent put into that one. And the Lion King sequels aren't that bad, but again Disney put more than a little effort into them and it shows.
Jeffrey Katzenberg is to blame for its underperformance at the boxoffice.
All because the opening numbers couldnt reach what he wanted and he pulled the tv advertisement for it. Of course Home Alone being out too probably drew away a lot of its viewers too
@Thomasmemoryscentral as much as I enjoyed him poking fun at Michael Eisner in the first Shrek movie, he seems like the kind of guy who would bleed ice water if you cut him.
I recently rewatched Peter Pan 2, and I gotta say that I really enjoyed it! Definitely one of the few good Disney sequels haha
I'm sorry to say but rescuers down under is not a good sequel either. the villain is not as compelling as medusa, the boy doesn't even meet the two mice until the climax of the film(hence no relationship or connection is built between them) and there is no overall tension or excitement in trying to save cody because the setting is not as claustrophobic as the bayou from the first film
There's a couple like Bambi 2 which I know are nowhere on the same league as the original but are still a guilty pleasure for me due to LEGITIMATE EFFORT being put into them.
Okay, I have to say it. Her name's Vanellope, not Penelope. Also, I strongly disagree on the take on Lion King 2 not treading new ground with its characters. Simba's arc was one of my favorites in that film. He spends the whole time trying to be Mufasa without realizing what made Mufasa a great king. It's called "Simba's Pride," which is a double entendré. On the one hand, it's talking about the pride of lions he leads. On the other, it's referring to his pride as he esteems his people above the Outlanders. Plus, Zira's a fantastic villain in her own right, preferring a much more deranged approach over Scar's more methodical technique. Now, admittedly Kiara's not the most compelling protagonist, especially up against Simba and Kovu, but the rest of the story makes up for it. Besides, it definitely doesn't follow the first film beat for beat, unlike Little Mermaid 2 which was basically a retread of what came before.
Don't forget the sequel's based off Romeo and Juliet.
I don’t know about you but I think the Lion Guard episode that featured Zira, Kovu, Nuka and Vitani pretty much had better exposition and backstory on who they were and why they were banished by Simba compared to the 2nd film which just have them appeared all of a sudden being as "former followers of Scar" before Simba banished them through mention and context without exposition considering in the original _Lion King_ film we didn’t see *ANY* Lionesses siding and being loyal with Scar.
Actually, The Little Mermaid 2 may have had a similar premise as the first movie, but it did have a lot of things that made it different despite the annoying reliance on visual callbacks. TLM 1 was a romance fantasy while TLM 2 was a coming-of-age journey. The movie was more about Melody, a girl who suffers from social anxiety disorder, self-loathing and lacks self-esteem, learning to accept herself if she wants to be accepted and that becoming a mermaid doesn't change who she is. The movie is also about Ariel learning to be a better mother. Her relationship with Melody was rough because she never had a mother figure of her own and became a mother at a young age. That combined with the trauma of Melody being almost devoured before her eyes made it harder for her to prioritize her happiness over her safety. Hence her character growth is learning that she can't protect Melody 100%, all she can do is her best.
The movie also emphasizes on how everyone has grown since the last movie rather than just going the Hunchback II route where the characters are just there. Ariel has grown into a sophisticated, mature and elegant queen, Eric has grown into a confident man who has embraced responsibility and has become more playful as a husband and a father and then there's Triton who is much warmer and more emotionally stable than in the last film.
@@vetarlittorf1807 Fair points
I love 2nd TLK, it's was my favorite TLK movie in the childhood and it's now. I mean the first one is great and it's classic but I still love Simba's Pride more. Zira is a great villain and her song is like a little child of classic "be prepared" hehe
Also Kiara literally had in her song line about her being not the smartest nor strongest
Cinderella III still has no right being as entertaining as it is. It's the one Diseny sequel I can watch over and over.
Given that Lion Guard became a thing and you see Kiara and Kovu, yes, people in Disney remember Lion King 2.
Also Simba himself also had an arc during that movie...
I will defend the Aladdin sequels that at least they continued the story in a fairly organic way. Jafar and Iago were explicly NOT killed off so the chance they could return was left on the table. Aladdin's story was mostly told in the 1st movie, so focussing more on the less developed characters made sense. Plus we see what a Genie!Jafar can really do and he's great as a villain who has to work within the restrictions of being a Genie. He's able to manipulate Iago and Abis Mal despite being unable to kill, he shows his cunning and vindictiveness. Iago gets a redemption arc and the ending leaves the window open for more adventures.
The 3rd movie is a good way to close the story out, Aladdin and Jasmine finally get married, we get to meet Aladdin's father, and the baggage that comes with it. The villains are fun, if not up to par with Jafar. We get some cool lore and worldbuilding, and action set pieces, and Aladdin's loyalties are tested as he has to deal with his father being the King of Thieves.
Do they measure up to the 1st movie? No, but at least you don't feel like the story is just repeating itself as many poorly written sequels tend to.
I agree completely out of all of Disney's terrible sequels Return of Jafar and King of Thieves were easily the best were they better than the first Aladdin of course not but they were still very enjoyable and kicked off the great Aladdin series and brought Iago back as a main character.
At least the Lilo & Stitch sequels and tv series actually left an impact on the franchise, like characters Hamsterviel and some of the experiments like Reuben, Sparky, Angel, Sample, Felix and 627 have appeared at the parks, some of them get merchandise (Angel in particular get the most attention in that department and recently there’s a Reuben Funko Pop! and a Leroy plush with sound), even Lilo & Stitch 2 has plenty of memorable Stitch moments that got turned into merchandise like Stitch in his footy pajamas for example. Heck, even an obscure experiment like Splodyhead got a brief cameo in Big Hero 6 as one of Fred’s pillows. So yeah, out of all the Disney sequels, the Lilo & Stitch ones are some of the most notable ones in terms of a lasting impact and expanding the lore of it’s universe in a meaningful way by introducing the concept of 625 experiments created before Stitch.
The lion king squeals are good too
Thank you for mentioning this! I think as far sequels/extended universes go, Lilo and Stitch was one of the most successful attempts at it. As different as the tone and direction was, it stayed in-character to the source material's themes. Things like Lilo and Stitch 2 and the series keep that theme of Ohana and family the main focus. Elements in the series are still embraced.
@@CatMario100 I couldn’t agree more. BTW, coming this spring, I’m creating a brand-new fansite dedicated to the franchise called Super Experiment Ohana. It’s going to be fun.
Rescuers Down Under is probably the best in terms of ani aged theatrical ones.
They throw Bernard and Bianca into Australia across the world, Cody is the new kid in danger in a more dangerous area than a bayou, George C Scott playing the poacher poses more of a threat above Medusa and Jake the new anthro character is a long lasting effect on fanart
@@superstitch5618 that's cool!
I think people do remember Kiara as Simba's daughter because she appeared in the Disney Junior show "The Lion Guard" which also introduced her little brother, Kion. So, that means her movie actually is memorable for Disney to flesh out her character in the series. I mean, I sure do love that movie as a child. As for the Little Mermaid 2, I agree that the plot is generic but Melody is beloved as a character (she's probably the only good thing in the movie). As for the other sequels, I wouldn't remember much if they weren't mentioned so yeah, Disney needs to take notes from Dreamworks on how to make a sequel
You mentioned that these sequels mostly felt pointless because the plots and arcs of the original movies were neatly tied up. I remember saying to myself when Shrek 2 was announced "What could they possibly do for a sequel?" and I was blown away at how good it was. So it got me thinking about why Dreamworks seems to know how to do sequels better than Disney; I think it's because Dreamworks is able to figure out what the next logical step in a character's story is, while Disney draws a blank.
Yeah I think Dreamworks is stronger when it comes to keep the continuity well and making sequels.
Even their tv series adaptations are pretty good.
Really got me thinking, Dreamworks is a better story teller than Disney.
@@giraffe6856 Maybe because Disney (not Pixar) does more adaptions of classic stories whereas Dreamworks makes their own from the ground up?
Disney's problem is what they think about first is making money and merchandise, rather than actually making a good story.
@@bl4ckrabb1t It seems they've forgotten that a good story will draw in a large crowd and get them more money.
Winnie the Pooh was the one film series that Disney repeatedly milked and yet struggled to truly ruin. The Tigger Movie and the 2011 main studio sequel in particular are almost as sweet and enjoyable as the original film. Heck even the TV shows like New Adventures are lovingly made.
axept they don't have lincess anymore, but we don't talk aboud it
dont talk about the chinese leader like that
tbf its hard to ruin a movie series thats this laid back
I absolutely forgot that tigger movie is a sequel when thinking of good sequels. That movie was one of my favorites growing up could sing the music all day in front a tv ❤
Disney struggles to ruin it, but indie studios aren’t having any problem at all…
I loved the first Wreck It Ralph, and I was so upset at how much they fumbled the ball with its sequel, especially because with a few tweaks, it would've actually been a really great film. I have no experience with writing a film, yet I have thought of a much better sequel than Walph Breaks My Patience:
It has been a year since the events of the first film, and while she has friends and the sugar racers respect her, Vanellope is terrified that everyone would abandon her and isolate her like they did in the first film because of her glitch. One day, out of her control, she glitches, and it causes her game to crash and get shut down, and all the racers treat her like they did in the first film and insunuate that it would have been better if she was never developed in the first place. She escapes to Slaughter Race, and she befriends Shank, who takes advantage of her emotional vulnerability to take her code so that she can make all her competition get shut down or something. Ralph is the only one who notices and tries to get her to see that she is being manipulated, but Vanellope says otherwise, and this causes a rift in their friendship. Shank betrays her, and Ralph, Felix, Calhoun, and all the racers they babysat help free Vanellope and beat Shank.
Is it perfect? Probably not, but at least it is better than what we actually got.
Then again, Lion King is a very, very hard act to follow.
I tried rewriting it, and what you said is actually close to what I came up only the racers are just mad but don't hate her.
@@gloydorangeboar3136Its best to scrap the whole script and completely from scratch.
The idea of Shank being the main villain of Wreck-It Ralph 2 is very intriguing. And it would actually make more narrative sense. Also, I’d have used the movie to expand Ralph and Vanellope’s relationship into a father-daughter bond, given more screen time for Fix-It Felix and Calhoun, and WAY less ego-stroking/Self-merchandising on Disney’s behalf.
But that’s just my opinion as a hobbyist writer.
Oh you got a better script there and the self sucking off Disney pulled there aged badly once more of the company’s dirty laundry came out.
Remember them wanting to cheapen park experiences with instagram walls for photos? Did those come out?
Oh most WIR fans would agree with you. It was reasonably expected that the four main characters (Ralph, Vanellope, Felix, and Calhoun) would adventure together since they're a found family, and we'd get more development amongst them since some of them didn't get to interact much. Felix and Vanellope, Calhoun and Ralph, etc.
That's the utter bare minimum of what can be expected of a sequel to a movie like this, and Disney still meddled it to death, since the actual crew did want those four to spend more time together (lots of unused storyboards, concept art, etc.). Disney chased off one of their best directors (Rich Moore) and ruined what could've been a great sequel, because they just absolutely had to remind everyone that they own a bunch of overmarketed characters who have no relevance to the Wreck-It Ralph franchise and show off that they know what the internet is.
@@fishdude2954 I was a huge fan of WIR until the second one come out.
The reason? The idea of lively videogame characters inside the arcades with their rules and laws that conveyed through Ralph and Venellope's journey.
But then they completely wiped out everything just for the sake of "internet". They intentionally breaking the forbidden rule in which was strictly alerted in the first place and creating another 'turbo' at ease.
@@sentrogaspers9813 WOOOOOOOOAH!!!! THAT SNAIL IS FAAAAAAAAST!!!!!
oh wait, wrong Turbo
Dreamworks is so much better than Disney and Pixar at making sequels. Shrek, Madagascar, How to Train Your Dragon, Kung Fu Panda, and the Croods. Even Trolls and Boss Baby have their fans and stayed true to their predecessors.
Dreamworks wants to please its audience. Unlike so many creators who destroy franchises out of spite or try to ''fix'' them to their own liking, Dreamworks respects its audience, characters, and lore. I'm sure they know fans want more, but they only make a sequel if they know it will be great.
Then again for every How to Train Your Dragon 3 and Madagascar 3, you also had Shrek the Third and Kung Fu Panda 3 which have gotten a bad rep from fans and called them as inferior to its two respective predecessors.
@@EChacon kung fu panda 3 was pretty good , its predecessors were definitely better, but it wasn’t bad at all
@@mikhailabraham421 I think you misinterpreted what I said, I’m not one of those people who disliked Kung Fu Panda 3, it’s just that I notice that the majority say it was inferior to the 2nd film (the one where most fans continue to laud and say it’s better than the first film).
Even the same can be said with Shrek the Third which most fans consider this film a giant step backwards to Shrek 2 and the first Shrek film.
Dreamworks has always been overshadowed by Disney, so they need to try actually pleasing fans and making stuff with quality, unlike Disney, who's philosophy is just "Use a name people know, and it'll sell." Plus Disney is continuously pushing its agendas, while Dreamworks is telling complex stories that everyone can agree with.
@@EChacon Kung Fu Panda 3 was a good film. It just couldn't match KFP1 or KFP2 with the much more comedic tone the producers wanted from it. But it still garners positive reviews to this day.
Shrek the Third was a disaster, but that was because the main guy (Andrew Adamson) behind both Shrek 1 and Shrek 2 was poached to direct Narnia. They also lost most of the other screenwriters who worked on Shrek 2. Losing the people responsible for the story and plot is a pretty big hurdle to overcome.
Which makes the utter failure of Ralph Breaks the Internet even more baffling. Between both the 1st and 2nd films, the main 3 people working on it remained the same: Rich Moore, Phil Johnston, and Jim Reardon. Normally getting everyone back together is a good sign that a sequel will be consistent with its predecessor, but Ralph Breaks the Internet took everything parameter set up in the 1st film and proceeded to have the main two characters break them. The dynamic between the two leads also changed so drastically to the point where both characters are unrecognizable. I don't understand how that film was botched so badly.
Hunchback of Notre Dame 2 having a bell with jewels on the inside is so, so dumb. That bell will not be able to function.
I think the idea was that the bell was beautiful on the inside, like Quasimodo
@@platanoluver That was the intention, and they relayed it about as subtly as being hit by a ton of bricks.
@@matthewmazzatto8003 🧱 “Now that just hurts like the Dickens!” - Larry the Cucumber (Sherluck Holmes and the Golden Ruler)
Lion King 2 remains one of the only Disney sequels I love, I can admit it's not nearly as good as the Lion King, but it remains near and dear to my heart.
Actually, Kiara, Simba's daughter, had a minor role in “The Lion Guard”.
Recent Disney and Pixar movies were rather underwhelming. Turning Red, Strange World and Lightyear lost money. The only movie made by these companies which most people don't hate or aren't completely indifferent to is Encanto. And there are already rumors of a sequel or a series, maybe both.
Disney is now reusing the same strategy it used years ago. Release a bunch of sequels to their beloved movies to make money. Tired of live-action remakes? How about a continuation?
Incredibles 2 (2018)
Ralph Breaks the Internet (2018)
Toy Story 4 (2019)
Frozen 2 (2019)
Do you know what they have in common?
They were super rushed because we have to pump multiple movies every year including bout Pixar and Disney, Marvel, live-action remakes, and whatever else this monopoly swallowed. Let's not forget Disney+!
They were in production hell. It's so obvious there was no plan for a continuation of so many of these projects. And even when there were because everything was so rushed nothing got properly developed and people just slapped everything together.
They made a huge amount of money!
In my personal opinion, original movies like Strange World, Raya and The Last Dragon, or The Good Dinosaur are less bad on the principle of not destroying already great characters. But they don't have the franchise recognition and the mentality of ''Sure the new movies are bad but this is the sequel to the classic. It must at least be somewhat good like its predecessor!''
Frozen 3
This is probably the most obvious of all as Frozen is Disney's most lucrative, overexposed, and overrated movie ever. The first Frozen isn't the best. It's not the worst thing ever but everybody agrees how overblown it was.
The message about not isolating yourself but also not trusting blindly, the prince being the bad guy, and the familiar love being the answer instead of romantic love is noble and somewhat novel at the time, at least for Disney but they could've been executed better.
Practically everyone and their mother has talked about how Hans is the worst twist villain and how his plan doesn't make any sense. And to those who want to see Hans back don't get your hopes up. Disney is way too proud of their subversive evil prince charming to walk back on it and redeem him. Besides, I have no idea what contrived reason would they have to come up with to bring him back.
Frozen 2 tries to explain Elsa's power but makes everything more confusing. Characters are sidelined or assassinated. And it contradicts the message of the previous movie.
I expect more of the same. More pretty clothes for Elsa and Anna so you buy new dolls for your kids. Pretty visuals and songs. Making fun of ''Let it go'' and Hans.
Someone on here called Frozen the Minions of Disney and I couldn't agree more.
Toy Story 5
I'm not breaking new ground by saying Toy Story should have ended with Toy Story 3. There already is a great video critiquing everything wrong with Toy Story 4 and I doubt that the 5th installment will fix the mistakes of its predecessor. Unless it will be worse and makes it look better by comparison. I expect more new toys with celebrity voice actors which only exist to sell more merchandise. And you thought Dreamworks was bad! At least most of their characters have a point to exist.
Watch this guy’s video. It’s great. ruclips.net/video/U__oaZ9FiXM/видео.html
Zootopia 2
This is the one I'm most concerned about. This one has the most potential I would love to see more of the wonderful city of Zootopia. But on the other hand, I can already see how it's going to be one of if not the worst and most controversial movies Disney will ever make.
And I can't believe I'm saying this but it isn't exactly Disney's fault. I already saw people calling Zootopia cop propaganda and criticizing how it's handled racism. (I disagree but it's not the time for this conversation.)
No matter on which political spectrum you are there are a lot of controversies surrounding the cops. Police brutality, the justice system not doing its job, and releasing criminals who already committed multiple felonies enabling them to terrorize innocent people, police acting like a militia for the elites and the new world order, stopping people from protesting in Hong Kong, Brazil, France, Denmark, and other countries.
Those are very complicated and serious issues. It's not like they can't talk about it in a kid's movie but it has to be done in such a way so the kids understand. Also, it has to make sense within the context of the story, the setting, and the characters. I can't imagine Judy beating somebody up because ''all cops are evil'' or Zootopia suddenly having a pandemic and politicians using it to take away the citizens' rights.
Also, with how incompetently Disney handled the very easy message of trust in Raya and the Last Dragon, or how in Incredibles 2 people would spit out random messages that never get any development and have nothing to do with the story, and how out of touch they are about the internet in Ralph Breaks the Internet, I don't trust Disney with telling me how to tie my shoes.
Remember how Zootopia has a very interesting and logical mystery story? I think it's already established how modern Disney can't write, so expect there not to be any mystery whatsoever, with characters acting stupid and mean for the sake of the plot.
I half expect them to split the characters at the end of the movie for a stupid reason. They've done it in Ralph Breaks the in Internet, Frozen 2, and Toy Story 4.
The other part of me thinks they're not going to do it because the Nick and Judy shippers will go insane if that happens. But don't expect them to get together. Disney is saving it for Zootopia 3 or the Zootopia series. Besides they don't have the guts to make it canon.
Toy Story 4 has overwhelmingly positive reception on rotten tomatoes
@@henrythef1guy768 I don't care for Rotten Tomatoes. We know that critics are giving good reviews when they are paid. And many audience scores are given right after the viewing. But then you look back at the movie and see how bad it is or don't because you completely forgot you even saw it. Also, not everybody leaves reviews and scores.
Ok, while I’m used to the criticisms of the characters splitting up element in both Ralph Breaks the Internet and Toy Story 4, but don’t call Elsa and Anna splitting up stupid. Elsa at least had a legit reason to leave her kingdom and move in among the Antahollan people in the Enchanted Forest since she was destined to be the guardian of both the Elemental Spirits and Antahollans and is fulfilling her duty keeping connections with both and that both relationships with the Elemental Spirits and the Antahollan tribe are in perfect and harmonious balance. Plus, she still has her familiar connection with her sister and royal connection to her kingdom to still visit both her sister and people and participate in family bonding like playing games with her sister, so she didn’t entirely abandon her kingdom and her family. So what it boils down to is you’re basically mad at Elsa for just doing her duty when your complaint of Elsa leaving is INVALID. I can understand feeling upset about the split ups in RBTI and TS4 because I can see some valid reasons, but Frozen 2’s split up is not even on the same level as those 2.
@@hunterolaughlin This!
Also so many people say Frozen 2’s message contradicts the first…except Elsa is merely setting up heathy boundaries while Anna is so clingy that SHE’S the one shutting out everyone else in her life without a second thought just to be by Elsa’s side 24/7.
I DISPIIIIIIIIIIISE ENCANTO, TURNING RED, LIGHTYEAR, AND STRANGE WORLD! THEY ARE PIECES OF GAAAAARBAGE.
Even as a 12/13 year old I knew Ralph breaks the internet was bad
A gut feeling told me to pass on Ralph Breaks The Internet blursy and it's likely because the licensing drew me in but it's not worth it for home media
Better than the Emoji Movie
@@joaquinm9148 rbti disgusts me but yeah its better than the emoji movie
@@briamari9035 i honestly disagree
the emoji movie to me is just mediocre mush with some lame "how do u do fellow kids!" type of humor
the type of movie you remember absolutely nothing about
rbti is awful and just promotion material it's basically disney just saying "LOOK AT ALL THE PROPERTIES WE OWN" which i guess you can argue the emoji movie did too, but rbti just ruined the characters. turned vanellope selfish and ralph into a big man baby
vanellope literally did what the villain from the first movie did which is.. yeah
this is just my opinion lol
@@curepinkie1637 no you right. That's the reason I hate rbti. If john lasseter was there that would never happen. The emoji movie isn't really a movie that I hate with all my guts and soul tho.
I mean lion king 2 and 1 1/2 are Disneys best sequels in my opinion, the animation didn’t look like crap, especially in 1 1/2, where the animation almost looks almost identical to the original.
Agreed
The Little Mermaid 2 is not a good movie, I admit. BUT Melody is a genuinely well written character. She goes through actual character development, her characterization and design make her a unique character from Ariel and she feels more multi-layered than Ariel herself.
As for The Jungle Book 2, it suffers from the same narrative problems as Return to the Sea, but at least they gave Mowgli character development and gave a lot of depth to Mowgli and Shanti's relationship, such as how they learn from each other, improve each other and complete each other.
Sign that the writers had more of a connection with a character concept that was legitimately theirs than the established ones. Regards, Samuel.
I totally agree with you. No wonder Melody is Tara Strong's personal favorite character. And she would have been a memorable character if her story had been 100% original with a different villain like a group of skeleton pirates, or a leviathan instead of a cheap Ursula clone.
@@orangeslash1667 How so ?
@@aidanhever3369 It's about a half mermaid named Emily who has a human mother and a merman father. The father was sent to prison because relationships between Merpeople and humans are illegal. Once Emily comes of age she discovers the ability to grow a tail when ever she's wet. Her goal in the first book is to save her father.
The Little Mermaid 2 sadly feels rushed and overly simplified by comparison. Like you said the one great thing is that Melody is such a wonderful character, but now that Tara Strong played Twilight from Ponies, that redeeming factor is now gone.
@@orangeslash1667 What did you mean by that ?
I'm so glad you talked about Cinderella 3, I freaking love that movie
14:34 Yeah you right. Dreamworks took 10 years to make the second Puss in Boots while Disney just sees money and makes another one
The first Wreck it Ralph had so much conflict like Ralph trying to win a medal in another game, Vanellope wanting to race, Felix trying to bring Ralph back to his game before it goes out of order & Calhoun trying to destroy all cybugs before they take over every game in the arcade.
Ralph Breaks the Internet was just fanservice with Disney characters like Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh & the Disney princesses.
Hey, at least we got to see all the Disney Princesses together for the first time and not just in a fan art or fan fiction. Although, maybe that scene can just exist as a short film apart from the film and still work. 🤷♂️
@@hunterolaughlin true. Vanellope meeting the Disney princesses was fun and entertaining. However you know what would have been more interesting: if Ralph meet the Disney VILLAINS. The first movie was about Ralph not wanting to be the bad guy anymore and wanting to be a good guy, but was told he couldn't change who he was. So Ralph meeting the Disney villains would make Ralph to teach the villains that they can become good guys.
When it comes to the Disney sequels including it’s direct-to-video sequels (sequels, prequels, midequels), the ones I consider the best sequels in my personal opinion, are _The Rescuers Down Under, Aladdin: The Return of Jafar, Aladdin and the King of Thieves, Fantasia 2000, The Jungle Book 2, The Lion King 2, The Lion King ½, Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp’s Adventure, Bambi II, Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch, Stitch the Movie, Leroy and Stitch, Cinderella 3: A Twist in Time, The Little Mermaid 2, The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning,_ and _Return to Neverland_
Disney at that time have better Writers at that time, until they left or retired, when new writers came, they don't know how to create sequels.
101 dalmatians 2
Bambi 2 was such a sweet movie, one of my favorites as a child
My personal favorite is Cinderella 3
At the very least, the aladdin sequels made sense in a story fashion, Jafar returns and gets defeated, the cartoon takes place and ends with the third movie with his dad, the king of thieves, so i think it wraps it up neatly.
"Hollywood did this a lot. If a picture made money, they would immediately come back with a sequel, but somehow they never seem to be able to realize what it was that made the first one good" - Ronald Reagan
This is why i love good series.(see buzz light-year of star command, big hero6 the series, or the tangled series)They go the borderline slice of life stuff that let's the Characters exist without forcing a bunch of out of character stuff. Wreck it Ralph was built for a series but now all that potential is ruined.
I enjoyed BLOSC and BH6 the series, and LOVED Tangled the animated series.
4:54 Lion Guard? While not the best show it also has Kiara, Kovu etc. as characters.
I agree with you as a whole about the Disney dvd sequels, but I would include Lion King 2 as up there in quality. I feel like they really captured Scar's manipulative personality in Zera's plan. Pretending to get in good with Simba and Kiara so he can eventually assasinate him. She felt genuinely threatening even when the lionesses turn on her at the end because Zera tries to take out Kiara. Personal stakes. Just my opinion
Heck, there exists an alternate cut of Ziras demise that could be darker had they gone through with it
The main reason why the movies always fail is bad world building. Because both they wanna try to maintain some familiarity so they're afraid to explore deeper across the world at the same time they also forget what made first one great thus being anti world Building.
It's the reason why the shows like aladdin lilo and stitch Tangled big hero six always do great because the show is not afraid to worlbuilding and focus on lesser known characters. Not to mention they all have one question their answering. Who are the other experiments? Are there other magical things of the genies in this world? What's the kingdom of Corona And if there's a sun flower is there moon flower
This is generally what I've been saying for years...what makes a good sequel is that there's a nugget of information from the first can expand what we know about this world and these characters in a sequel. Worldbuilding. But that requires a HUGE awareness of what can expanded on in the first place and making damn sure a sequel can work around/within that.
Finding Dory is a perfect example of this. Not that it's perfect sequel, but it follows that rule of thumb generally well. A Dory centered sequel was the ONLY thing that made any sense. It expands on a character people loved already and were curious about, and added to the world we know, even if imperfectly. Most of these sequels don't add a damn thing to the universe of the original, so they fall flat as hell or make no sense at all. Frozen had potential for good sequel but they decided to be ridiculous, go cash cow and squander that opportunity. Now we're stuck with a seemingly endless loop of awful sequels and live actions.
It's possible that DreamWorks Sequel have better Writers, and understanding the Characters very well, plus they created the Storyline differently.
Reason why Disney Sequels don't do good is because they keep the repeating the same storyline.
Love how Disney were so desperete to have everyone forget about melody they didn’t even include her in their ever after high rip off franchize where the focus is all about Disney princesses and villains having kids
I do think Lion King 2 is good based on the fact that it basically adapts a Shakespeare story like the first movie. Just replace "Hamlet" with "Romero and Juliet."
I agree with you mostly but I won't stand for this Lion King 2 slander. One of the few sequels that had a plot and theme that tied to the first movie. Plus the animation quality was pretty good.
I hate being nit picky but Kiara was in the Disney Jr. Series “The Lion Guard”. Hell Season 3 of that show literally exists to explain where Kion was during the events of Lion King 2.
Underrated Opinion.
I love the sequel to the little mermaid, it presents a lot of fun parallels
9:33 I know that the literally movie is Ralph being attached to a 9 year old BUT literally think about the underlying cause of why he’s doing it and what he’s representing. To me, Ralph is representing someone who found a new sense of living/being bc of someone new and now that “someone new” is going off to do new and even better things in their life but Ralph is like nooo wait i still wanna be by your side with whatever you do and Vanellope is saying “oof i want to do this new thing, but what about Ralph? He’s gonna be so sad if i leave and do my own thing” (literally in her song: “A Place Called Slaughter Race”).
She literally went Turbo and Disney thought we forgot about what Turbo did in the first one.
@@briamari9035 i don’t really think Disney is pushing that to the side, i think they’re just saying that’s her own choice, she knows the consequences. I don’t remember Puss in Boots 2 bringing up the egg 🤷🏽♂️
It's worse than that. Going Turbo is basically considered the worst crime imaginable in the wreck it Ralph universe not just because it puts you at risk of dying but because it also puts everyone else from the game that you both came from and go to at serious risk of becoming homeless and dying. It's been a while since I saw the movie but I don't think Venelople can respawn in Slaughter Race. A game like that most likely has the characters dying and respawning all the time there's no way she would last long, even if she took input away from the player to avoid crashes, she most likely would be "fixed" in a patch which wouldn't end up well for her. On the other side Sugar Rush is an old game that already had to have one if it's parts replaced, combined with the fact that Venelople was stated to be the most popular character do you honestly think Sugar Rush would last much longer? So basically everyone is screwed
I don’t think The Lion King 2 is a bad movie, actually. It’s clear they put a lot of effort into it, and while it’s obviously that no one could ever top the original, they still did a pretty good job. I think, had they added two scene just to flesh out some characters on the side (and re-added that insane original villain death scene), it could’ve easily been on the same standard of some higher revered Disney original films-rather than just a generally good Disney film; and a great sequel.
The main reason is because Disney defecates on the concept of creative freedom for sequels, even theatrical ones. They still work from a playbook from the 1950s in terms of what they think audiences want.
In some cases at least, no, the sequels aren't bad because "the narrative wrapped up in the first movie". That would necessitate a Part 2 of the same movie, not a full sequel. Look at Toy Story - that movie didn't have a cliffhanger and yet it has at least 2 good sequels because the characters and world are very rich for further development.
Wreck-It Ralph for instance is an awesome movie, with fantastic potential to be a series up there with Toy Story - great found family of characters, infinite story potential, and a crew of people who genuinely enjoyed making it and had tons of unused ideas stocked up for more material.
But the "sequel" threw away the entire plot of half the main cast at the last minute and reduced them to offscreen babysitting instead of being on the adventure, and made everyone else look like out-of-character idiots - especially Ralph and Vanellope (her name isn't Penelope, come on, it's been 10 damn years so please at least do a 5 second Google search) - to justify the plot. Even the new characters barely got to do anything, and the forced irrelevant cameos and internet jokes took center stage.
This certainly wasn't what the crew wanted - the director Rich Moore left Disney soon afterwards and even offhand mentioned creative freedom as a reason, plus the aforementioned other ideas the crew has revealed on their blogs and in concept art and such.
It's easier for Disney to just keep churning out either low-effort "new" movies that are more alike to each other than creative sequels would be to their sources, or infinite side installments of princesses/Star Wars/anything else that's already been beaten into the ground, all while treating their workers like garbage. It's sad because it doesn't have to be this way, with all the money Disney has.
The goal of making a sequel is making it shine by itself. Something that won't make the audience go "oh I don't get the context, I better watch the first movie". In PIB: the last wish, they made a brand new original plot that wouldn't confuse their viewers. You didn't even need to watch the first movie to understand that Puss and Kitty were ex lovers. They also didn't mention humpty because they only focus on the characters that are relevant to the sequel
I actually came up with an idea for an internet based Wreck it Ralph sequel, focusing on Online Gaming and Fandoms, rather than just "internet"
Can you do why Dreamworks sequels don't suck? Mainly because i wanna see the contrast between disney and dreamworks when it comes to thier sequel quality
Well, Shrek 3 is the weakest movie in the quadrilogy.
@@Rokabur Andrew Adamson who directed Shrek 2 couldn't be involved with the third one because he was working on the Narnia films.
bro Lion king 2 expands concepts of the original movie as well as continuing that universe in a logical way (also lion king 2 stuff was continued in the tv show that came out decades later but anyway) sorry I cannot agree that lion king 2 is worthless, it's a genuinely great movie that has it's own ground to stand on and a ton of banger songs
No it doesn't. The outsiders made no sense at all. We get no explanation of how they formed of where they were in the events of the original.
Never explained why Scar chose Kovu as his successor or why he would even are for one.
Simba is a bigoted and gullible asshole.
Many of the songs are just rehashes of the original:
He lives in you-Circle of Life
Lullaby-Be Prepared
Love will find a way-Can you feel the love tonight?
LK2 is pretty bad and unfaithful
I'm glad that you took a moment to mention how ridiculous it is that series like Aladdin aren't on Disney Plus.
Disney has no reason to playsafe with their sequel.
Counter point, melody in little mermaid 2 is often cosplayed in the mermaid community and the lion king sequels (mostly number 2) are referenced in lion guard. Some of the direct to dvd s equals do have some impact when in the right circumstances. Hell while Cinderella 2 is a cash grab, number 3 is a hidden gem of what should be an insane modern retelling of the original 1950s classic using time travel that no other Cinderella retelling has ever tried.
I need to say you did reference when some of the sequels were good. But most are just plain bland to the point of making chicken little more entertaining.
The worst thing about the alleged sequel to *Wreck-It Ralph* is that it almost makes King Candy look like he knows what he’s talking about in the original film. Vanellope had the chance to handle responsibility, and she blew it! But instead of blaming her for abandoning her people, the movie blames Ralph for being too needy as he becomes a phenomenon on a ludicrously inaccurate, instantly outdated, thoroughly boomerized ersatz version of the Internet.
every history needs a good protagonist, charismatic villain and lovable secundary characters 🤔
bambi 2, brother bear 2, lion king 1& 1/2 and lion king 2 = goat sequels
Uhh watching the Aladin at the intro part gives me a deja vu for something that I've forgot for decades but actually I still remember it
4:49 you’re tripping. Lion king two is great and we loved kiara as kids. Melody was indeed forgettable tho
I will admit I grew up with Return of Jafar. A few of the songs in it are good, but it won't compare to the first.
Ariel’s Beginning is underrated as well
If only ninja dalmations wasn't invented "music" has to be the dumbest reason for a Disney mother to die from...
That is a good question. Why isn't Aladdin the series on Disney+?!😭😭😠😠
Good video, a lot of great points where brought up. Keep up the good work❤
Wait, isn't Return to Neverland considered better than the original by quite a few people?
I definitely think so
Really? Because i thought that wasn't good
maybe because unlike the original it aged wayyy better. like it didnt feature the absurd racial stereotypes of indigenous people, jane was a really good and well written protagonist, it wasnt really misogynistic to its female characters like making tinker bell a crazy psycho who was trying to kill wendy bc she was jealous of her while peter pan keeps treating her like shit, or making wendy (a child) fill a sweet and nurturing mother role that a child like her shouldnt be taking at all, and in the end it actually brought some closure to peter and wendy's relationship in a satisfying way. peter saw that wendy grew up and was dissapointed in her because he thinks all adults are terrible, but wendy, despite being an adult, never stopped believing in neverland and magic, despite the horrible things that were going on in the world. she showed him that she never abandoned her inner child.
regarding Wendy, in the time the story was written, this was actually what was expected of girls her age, since she would have also married very early in life - so for her original time period Wendy was portrait quite right - it was considered age-appropriated behavior + the whole concept of childhood as we know it was just invented in the 19th century by the upper class, so even back then, the poorer you are the lesser the chance for you being a child, the concept as such wasn't even known by the lower classes
I'll admit that I put both the original and Return to Neverland in both C and D tier on my tier list, so neither of the movies aged very well, well at least for me.
I love the lion king 2, and Kiara does play a big role in the lion guard (a kids Disney show from the lion king about Kiara and her brother)
For some reason, whenever Disney decides to do a sequel they give it to writers and producers and directors that don't care about the original movies. Especially since 2016. And that's what pisses me off the most; if you're going to continue the story with these beloved characters then you'd better keep them consistent and treat them with respect.
Except for Frozen 2, which was clearly given to an Elsa simp.
The Lion King sequel was good. The villain Zira was a great predecessor to the legendary villain Scar. Zira had her own pride of lionesses that totally were eating alive Simba's lionesses. This makes the Outsiders cannibals. Scar's hyenas were getting washed by the pridelanders
No it doesn't. The outsiders made no sense at all. We get no explanation of how they formed of where they were in the events of the original.
Never explained why Scar chose Kovu as his successor or why he would even are for one.
Simba is a bigoted and gullible asshole.
Many of the songs are just rehashes of the original:
He lives in you-Circle of Life
Lullaby-Be Prepared
Love will find a way-Can you feel the love tonight?
LK2 is pretty bad and unfaithful
@@sarveshnathan7559 that's true. The Outsiders are labeled as a pride of lionesses who got banished for being loyal to Scar with Zira being their leader, but Zira her lionesses were never in the first movie. During Scar's rule, the lionesses in the pridelands didn't like Scar's rule & when Simba came back, they sided with Simba. The only animals that supported Scar until he betrayed them were the hyenas. And the hyenas didn't appear in the second movie.
@@joshualowe959 So yeah, it makes no sense that there are a band of lionesses loyal to Scar considering all of them fought against him in the original movie and how everyone saw him as a terrible ruler, even the hyenas.
@@sarveshnathan7559 the only lioness who would still be loyal to Scar no matter what would be Zira and she was not itln the first movie either. Then there's the Lion Guard where a new generation of hyenas, Janja & his clan, along with Ushari the snake decide to revive Scar as an evil fire spirit and they also recruited animals like jackals, crocodiles, vultures & lizards to create the "Army of Scar", HOWEVER the female hyena jasiri decided to create a hyena resistance to fight against Scar to help the Lion Guard. But during this time, Janja & his clan never thought about recruiting Zira & her pride. Zira would have been so happy to see Scar again. She even said that she & Scar were very close.
Whatever he's guilty of, I still feel a strong sense of gratitude to John Lasseter for stopping those abominable DTV sequels. And if he were still in place at Disney I really feel he'd try to stop those equally horrible live-action/CGI remakes we're being plagued with now.
I'm sorry but Cinderella 3 is AMAZING! I wish the live action was based on it instead of the original
Yeah Cinderella 3 and Lion King 2 were the goats.
The sequel to Wreck it Ralph destroying the point of the original film could have actually worked, and even doing so while respecting the original movie
But that's not the timeline that we live in
A fundamental issue with the shortcomings of attempts to faithfully carry on iconic characters is that the people given the task may not necessarily have familiarised themselves with what the characters had had to endure in the first place. In addition, Walt Disney, being the ambitious person he was, was apparently very reserved about doing sequels, considering a film to be what it is and allowing himself thus to focus on a new project. Indeed most people in Walt's time could hardly have imagined just how far-reaching an impact a solid film could have on its audience - filmmakers even wondered in the midst of production their work would be guaranteed success at all, that they keep coming back to them because they enjoy the characters so much. It would be inevitable then that people would ask for more. When a good sequel is written, it's when the people who make it are aware of the characters while also appreciating what could be done with them moving forward. In my eye that's something that shouldn't be left to chance.
Regards, Samuel Farris.
Bro has miserable views but makes greater content than many, many people.
Great job keep it up!
It may be the only direct-to-DVD sequel to surpass the original, in both animation quality, story, and character development
How are they miserable?
I have some odd feelings towards the sequels, particularly the Direct to Home Video / DVD ones long before 2011 Winnie the Pooh, Frozen 2, and the obnoxious abomination that is Ralph Breaks the Internet. While I haven't watch all of them considering I'd just take some people's word about them, but there are some that I personally like and enjoy. They're obviously not going to top the original by any means, but they make some, well I think, some decent effort for trying to expand on the franchises, whether or not it succeeds or not is up to you, but this is just me expressing from my point of view.
The Aladdin and Lion King sequels are usually my personal examples when it comes to successful sequels. As a big fan of Aladdin, The King of Thieves is a great finale for the Aladdin series to see Aladdin and Jasmine not only get married, but also learn a little more of Aladdin's family tree and bring in one of the many elements from the stories of the 1001 Arabian Nights, like the 40 thieves. As for Return of Jafar, it's more of a guilty pleasure but is obviously not as good as King of Thieves given most of the songs are bland and forgettable, the animation is obviously tv quality, and there's too much focus on Iago compare to the main cast. Granted, Jafar is one my personal favorite villains it's interesting to see get his revenge on Aladdin and was very close to getting Aladdin killed. For the Lion King, Simba's Pride is a worthy follow up on the original as it's based on Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet. Zira is a more deadly villain compare to Scar as she wants blood rather then control of the land, and Kovu has an interesting character arc. 1 in a half is funny on some level but it's not quite as good as Simba's Pride.
There are other successful sequel like Lilo and Stitch: Stitch has a Glitch, Beauty and the Beast Enchanted, and Atlantis Milo's Return as a guilty pleasure as I'm a HUGE fan of the original Atlantis the Lost Empire movie.
I felt on the series, mine I am still waiting for is Buzz Light-year of star command. The actual show that inspired Andy.
To be fair, they're still learning; Disnry Animation has only made 2 theatrical sequels. Plus "Into the Unknown" makes me SUPER sympathetic towards sequels during the production process.
While I agree that Disney largely pumps stuff out solely for profit, I disagree that a sequel needs to first be set up by the original. You should really think of Disney film series as episodic rather than a long-form story. It's SpongeBob, not a planned trilogy. If enough people ask for a sequel, even if the original already closed out the character arcs and plot lines, the writers must then come up with entirely new shit or go back and rehash what was already done. You can't expect a sequel to expand on or continue a story when that story was already complete. In the case of Disney, yes it's fan service and a big cash grab, but you should still go into the sequels as their own individual stand-alone stories, just like an episode of SpongeBob.
However, Disney should probably leave enough things open in the originals to allow some wiggle room for sequels. That much is a fair criticism. Another fair criticism is that Dreamworks tends to do sequels better, but they probably also plan ahead whereas Disney seem to... NOT plan ahead.
Interesting. Then let me ask you, what do you think of Pocahontas 2? That’s my favourite DTV sequel because that actually had Pocahontas explore London, think about how much of her culture does she need to sacrifice for the greater good.
Can you please how do you make your videos? I’m really desperate to know how can I find footage for the shows and films and what equipment to use
I heard Disney is planning to make a sequel to Zootopia and that title is Zootopia 2 when they make it they better not screw up no more twist villains the sequel has to be better than the first and I wonder will they use the same animation from the original, or go with a new animation style like
puss in boots,the last wish did
the main character in the first Aladdin sequel isn't Aladdin, it's Jago - he goes through an arc and comes out on the other side hence why he was part of the team in the series, I also loved the fact that at the end of king of thieves, he leaves with Aladdin's father
Those movies weren’t made with sequels in mind and Disney sure does like money.
The lion king 2 was actually really or at least I thought it was
It's actually pretty widely loved, more than most
It’s 💩
I hope pus in boots 2 conditions disney into actually trying
I can understand why Disney doesn't want to throw another villain at the characters after they defeated the last one. But take a look at the Shrek franchise, Shrek 2 added a new villain and Puss in Boots 2 added three. These are considered to be some of the greatest sequels of all time as well. So why not just add a new villain?
I don’t know about you guys, but I’m pretty hyped for Inside Out 2 and Zootopia 2!
Disney needs to take notes from DreamWorks.
Hunchback of Notre Dame 2's villain was a joke compared to Frollo
The Aladdin TV show was much better than "Return of Jafar"
One of my favorite movies is Zootopia. However, with the announcement of a sequel, and Disney's track record with sequels, I'm worried that one of my favorite worlds will be tarnished.
Frozen 2 wasn't that bad in my opinion. I liked it enough to see it twice in theaters and 39 other times on DVD. I'm worried about the third one
The sad part about all this is that the general audience will gobble up anything disney will put and advertise.
Its shit like this that has me worried about Zootopia 2. I REALLY VERY don't want it to end up like Wreck-It Ralph 2, Rio 2 and other terrible sequels.
I will say, the Aladdin TV series actually did have a few surprisingly good storylines.
I’m at the 6:15 mark rn but i wanna say something. I still do think that Ralph breaks the Internet is it’s a good movie it teaches you about how people can hold you back from doing your dreams so overall, I think Ralph two and frozen two are good movies.
They all have pretty colors
You have a point
Return to Neverland while frustrating, was a really cool movie. I loved it when I was younger
Ashley Curry from why can't you is actually in the lion guard
Hey, the Lion King 2 was actually pretty good. One of the best sequels Disney made in my opinion. Though the 1 1/2 film was still better.
I don't think the lack of a Villain is an inherent problem in a film. But it is weird that Disney has completely abandoned part of what was so iconic to their own formula.
It's not the lack of villains in any one film. It's the lack of strong and distinctive antagonists in ANY of their animated films that stands out so much.
Mulan 2 was fire and you barley mentioned it in passing 😢
To be fair I loved return of Jafar when I was a child had the vhs tape and all that. Ot for me was one of the few sequels I really cherish as lion king and little mermaid sequels specially because the songs
Edit: Comments just reminded me that tigger movie is a sequel of winnie the pooh and that movie is just wholesome ❤
I also remind now that lady and the tramp 2 was somewhat fun too
Toy story was good on their sequels at least the first 2 then they really lost their north.
Lion King 1 1/2 is still a banger film I love to this very day. Yes it's not perfect and has a couple of plotholes if you were to actually merge this story with the original Lion King's story, but despite that, it's still a really fun movie. One that not only gave you a neat look at TLK1 from Timon and Pumbaa's perspective, but it also expands the universe in pretty interesting ways. Arguably way more than Simba's Pride.
Lion King 2's an okay film, but it's not one I'm as thrilled by when compared to the original and 1 1/2. Mostly with the story and animation quality. The story is... fine. Not great, but it works okay enough as a continuation. The animation on the other hand is something I'm really not a fan of. Idk what it is about it, but there's just something about the dull and darker colors that give me deviantart vibes, and not the best kind either. If I was to judge the lion king sequels based solely on animation quality alone, then 1 1/2 easily takes the crown for best visuals. It's just way more vibrant and close to the original film's color palette (but maybe that's just 1 1/2 bias speaking).
Also what was with some parts of the world calling it Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata? I know marketing works differently in other regions, but it's still a really stupid name that doesn't fit with the film's actually about. Even the US trailer poked fun at this by having Timon screw around with the logo.
Let’s have a friendly debate! I don’t know if this was covered in the video but it’s a topic I’ve been wanting to discuss for as long as there have been Disney sequels. So, are the sequels canon or not canon? Remember this is ALL sequels even the ones made by Pixar. Only one rule: no cherry picking. Other than that, let’s have some fun!
7:13 This never fails to make me laugh no matter how much I watch it- Cinderella 3 is one of the only sequels of a disney classic that I actually liked
I do like some of its sequels, but so many are movies I never even knew existed, such as Aladdin 2, and Moana 2, because surely they’d have made a sequel to a movie before they remade it in live action only 7 years later if it was that good…
I disagree, I REALLY loved the Lion King 2. Especially the songs, and Kovu is a MEGA CHAD!!!