The Best And Worst Sequels Of 2013 - Part 11
Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.

The Best And Worst Sequels Of 2013

I’m on record as being relatively ambivalent when it comes to an opinion on the virtues of remakes, sequels and reboots. Simply put, any story, whether it’s a retelling or continuation of an old story, or one that’s entirely “new” (if there is such a thing), is dependent on the people telling it more than where it’s drawn from. For every person who can claim that the second movie in a series is always the best (like The Empire Strikes Back), another can claim that movies should usually be left as standalone successes (like Jaws or Psycho).
This article is over 11 years old and may contain outdated information
[h2]5) The Hangover Part III and more[/h2]

The Hangover Part III

Recommended Videos

There were actually quite a few sequel duds this year, though I’m not sure if anyone actually expected them to be anything but duds. The Hangover was a surprising success 4 years ago, but its subsequent followups were rather poor by comparison (and I wasn’t even a big fan of the first one). The good news is that its stars all gained higher profiles and have done exceptional work since their breakthrough back in 2009.

Other sequels from this year that I didn’t watch because I heard they were so bad: The Smurfs 2, Insidious Chapter 2, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2, Monsters University (this one may not have been bad but nah), Red 2, and whatever number Scary Movie is at now.

It’s understandable to assume that anything with a “2” in the title is a cynical attempt by some movie studio to capitalize on the success of a previous movie by making audiences think they’ll be getting the same product if they pay to see the new one. This is often the case. My wish is merely that franchises themselves are treated on an individual basis based on the quality of the filmmakers and finished products themselves, because dismissing good movies based on a prejudice like sequelphobia is a tad narrow-minded.


We Got This Covered is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy