Sequels never used to be as good as the original, but now they
can be even better. Can 'Transformers 2' follow suit?
By Don Kaye Special to MSN Movies
Let's just get it out there in case you missed the memo back in 2007: Michael Bay's long-awaited movie of "Transformers" was ... morelousy. There's just no two ways about it.
Whether you were a fan or not, the movie's plot was inane beyond belief, the
characters were wooden and spouted dialogue even George Lucas would be
embarrassed to write, and the money shots -- massive, city-leveling battles
between the Autobots and the Decepticons -- were too few and far between.
Yet in the finest tradition of P.T. Barnum, "Transformers" managed to make a
boatload of cash, so sure enough, "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" smashed its
way onto the big screen making over 200 million dollars in its first 5
days. The trailers promise more ferocious battles, more massive explosions and
more suggestive outfits for the otherwise acting-challenged Megan Fox. But can a second "Transformers" movie be any
worse than the first? Is it possible that it could even be . . . better?
There's certainly precedent for it, especially when it comes to sci-fi,
horror and superhero movies. To be sure, many of the original movies weren't
even bad -- and were often very good -- in the first place. Yet while that's not
always the case, it gives us hope: If a damn-fine movie like "Batman Begins" can
give way to the masterpiece that is "The Dark Knight," surely the second
"Transformers" can aspire to the same relative heights. And for the most part,
the days of sequels being cheap knockoffs -- "Beneath the Planet of the Apes,"
anyone? -- are long gone. Take a look at the list below and see if you agree
with the hits and relatively few misses we've picked. And if "Transformers 2"
ends up like its predecessor ... well, third time's always the charm.