Surprisingly Improved Sequel
launched as Surprisingly Improved Sequel Discussion
: From YKTTW
Working Title: Surprisingly Improved Sequel: From YKTTW
: I would like to object to the recommendation not to see the first five seasons of Stargate SG-1
. I think it's been consistently well-written and well-acted, it's just that the later seasons had bigger budgets and more CGI eye-candy. However, under no circumstances watch the pilot first
. I'd recommend starting with "The Broca Divide", sitting through the first season, then watching the movie, "Children of the Gods", "The Enemy Within" and "Emancipation".
: Regarding X-Men
... while the first is
often criticized for playing the role of "set things up for the sequel," was it really that
lacking in the plot department compared to the second? They went into Wolverine's Back Story
, and that's always fun, but apart from that...
- I think the X-Men series is an excellent example, but the editor was a little harsh. "Semi-trashy"?
: After already owning 9 seasons of SG-1, I finally
got round to buying the movie, but only really so my girlfriend could see it. I plan to buy the Buffy movie, uh, never. Especially after seeing the trailer for it on the Buffy DVD.
: I toned down the recommendation "not to see the first seasons" and removed the claim that SG-1 doesn't get good until season 6.
Azreal: Possibly just one man's opinion, but I think the original Dark Cloud is FAR superior to the sequel. PS2
's Greatest Hits series, which DC2 (I don't think) achieved. "Makes the original not even looked at?" Um...almost definitely not.
Gattsuru: Dark Cloud 2 sold more copies and was reviewed at similar or higher values, and it did get a Greatest Hits release, but the second release was very
limited in America. I don't think it fits the surprisingly improved trope, though, simply because it misses out on the "This is about the sequels to products that either sucked or weren't that good to begin with... This is not about products that were already very good but got better." I can't in any degree of honesty call DC1 not the good in the first place, and a Greatest Hits release alone suggests that I'm not alone on that. Pulling :
"The original Dark Cloud was a mildly entertaining though repetitive-as-all-hell dungeon crawler with a thin plot. Its sequel made the dungeons less repetitive, expanded the fighting options for each character, added in fun mini-games and gave it a significantly better plot. It basically removed any desire to even look at the original. "
: Pulled the line about Dark Cloud again. "Like a noob on Halo 3" is a top contender for worst trope description ever.
KI: Removed the example about Nintendo series. I wrote the text of the first part for Growing the Beard, someone who had the definitions of this page and Growing the Beard confused moved them.
"And of course, GTA IV has garnered overwhelmingly positive reviews - and in many cases, perfect reviews."
Because I don't think anybody expected anything other than overwhelmingly positive reviews from it. Kinda robs it of the surprise factor
Prfnoff: Removed, because others don't seem to think it's even a good movie, let alone improved:
- French Connection II, while not better than the first, was a damn good movie in its right. Could be considered a case of a movie being the Replacement Scrappy....
And The Empire Strikes Back
wasn't responsible for sinking Luke/Leia. Return of the Jedi
Dragon Quest Z
: This is not just improved sequels. A lot of examples are just "I wasn't that impressed by the last work". Those should be cut.
: Any television show that gets better after its first season is Growing the Beard
. Not only that, but it isn't even a sequel, it's the same show.
I also removed a lot of natter
and a few people are like "I was the only one who liked the sequel." This trope can be subjective, but usually there is a general consensus, not just a lone holdout.
: Just deleted a whole lot of examples that where "excellent series, sequel slightly better", if the first one was excellent, than it doesn't fit its Surprisingly Improved Sequel
not Marginally Improved Sequel Of An Excellent First Film
Examples Toy Story changed animation forever the fact that Pixar proved that the first one wasn't a fluke isn't a surprise. Godfather is considered one of the finest movies ever created not exactly suprising when the second is better. Pink Panther is generally considered an excellent film.
I also deleted examples that simply had a weak entry for example its not Suprising that Devil May Cry 3 was good since the first one was also good, the second one is just suprisingly crap.
: Yu-Gi-Oh "season zero" may have horrible production values, I'll grant you that. But I found the plot far more interesting and the show in general far more badass than the second series. Is the Toei series really that hated? I was under the impression that it had a good sized fanbase, and that Little Kuriboh's Take That
at it was not the norm. (Granted, season zero may still fit here for production values alone, but I contest the "markedly better storyline plotting".) Then again, this is
Doktor von Eurotrash: Fully agree. In my opinion, the Konami series is far better-looking and had better music, but is much more childish and infested with The Merch
. Entire episodes of card games, hooray! Sure it has an interesting plot, but it's atrociously slow-paced (the Duellist Kingdom storyline could easily be cut down to half the number of episodes without losing any of the plot), and the Toei series has just as interesting plotlines, particularly the longer story arcs towards the end of the series (the Death-T arc and the "trapped in a tabletop RPG" arc). Also, the characters in the Toei series were a bit more interesting: Anzu/Téa was a tough tomboy instead of just the love interest, and Honda/Tristan had some actual personality. Personally, I'd say that the Konami series was a step down from the Toei one, looks aside.
: Removed the Full Metal Panic!
example, since the first season was by no means mediocre.
: Removed this:
- While Diablo was not a bad game per se, it's sequel Diablo II was far better received. A specific improvement: Much of the gametime in the first involved walking back to town to heal/restock. The distance from the action areas back to town was unneccessarily long and didn't even have any interesting visuals. The sequel fixed this with Waypoints and Town Portal scrolls that allowed for less walking around empty areas.
- Um, excuse me? Diablo had Town Portal as a spell, not even restricting it to the scroll form, and it had several waypoints allowing you to get back to town from dungeon and vice versa. Moreover, sequel is much more annoying with long walking distances at some places, namely Third Act.
was an extremely well-received game. While most people think the sequel was an improvement, it was not surprisingly so, and certainly not the difference between a sub-par game and a good game. Also, as the comment points out, the criticisms in the original post are off-base.