Movies That Never Should Have Had A Sequel

[SonofSinbad]

The Terminator

Can you still ban members of staff ?

[Dr. Chim Richalds]

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.  It says "LAST", damnit!

Also, I never saw it, but The Neverending Story II.

[jrWHAG42]

The Dark Knight. 
Batman Returns (though I'm watching Forever right now for the first time in a while, and it's really not all that bad. I guess this one then. Batman and Robin is really the only bad one of the 4.)
Silence of the Lambs. 
Jurassic Park (to be fair, I haven't seen any of them in their entirety except for Jurassic World).

[Duragizer]

Alien
The Blair Witch Project
The Butterfly Effect
Candyman
Children of the Corn
Child's Play (haven't seen the sequels, but they sound like trash)
Death Wish (haven't seen the sequels, but they sound like trash)
Ghostbusters
Hellraiser
Highlander
The Hills Have Eyes (haven't seen the sequel, but it sounds like trash)
The Hitcher
Jaws
Jurassic Park
A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (this should've been the absolute final entry in the series)
Pet Sematary
Phantasm
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Poltergeist
Predator
RoboCop
The Silence of the Lambs
Sleepaway Camp
Star Wars

[jrWHAG42]

Personally, I think Child's Play 2 is the best in the series. Several people I know say that Curse of Chucky is the best. 3 wasn't bad, Bride was funny, haven't seen Seed or Cult, but Cult is supposedly great. I recommend checking them out sometime.

Hellraiser, I've only seen the first film, but isn't the second a direct continuation and regarded well?

I completely agree with Nightmare on Elm Street. 

I actually really like Predator 2, but I won't try to say it's objectively better.

I actually almost said Star Wars. I love most of the other films, but the first film is my favorite and could've totally stayed a stand alone film.

[Duragizer]

Hellraiser, I've only seen the first film, but isn't the second a direct continuation and regarded well?

I do like Hellraiser II, but it's an open-ended sequel which set up Hellraiser III, so I hold that against it.

I actually almost said Star Wars. I love most of the other films, but the first film is my favorite and could've totally stayed a stand alone film.

Suffice to say, I come from the opposite direction; I LOATHE most of the other films. The current state of the franchise and fandom both has quashed much of my enthusiasm for the franchise, and it wasn't particularly high even before Disney purchased Lucasfilm. I can't even enjoy the OT on its own, as I hate ROTJ. So I'm left SW '77, the only SW film which doesn't need a prequel or sequel to work.

[Canon Editor]

I’d say: 
- Saw 
- Jaws 
- Halloween 
- The Dark Knight (as much as I like The Dark Knight Rises) 
- Jurassic Park 
- Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (can’t agree more Dr. Chim Richalds)

[TMBTM]

There are different kind of sequels and so different kind of problems.


You have the direct sequel continuing a story that was planned like that. 
You have have direct sequels that were only made because the first movie was a hit. 
You have different stories with reccurent characters, so you kind of judge each movie independently (the fact Indy 4 was not great does not make Raiders less good).

And then there is.... The Terminator...! (yes again a "rant" of mine about Terminator)

Even if I am among the rare people who can enjoy ALL Terminator movies (on different levels of course!) I sort of agree with TM2YC . The Terminator is a perfect loop story where the goal is not to change the future but to make it happen the way it should be (the whole story itself implies that nothing can be changed) . So as soon as you start to play with different timelines, you're fucked, because it is supposed to be a serious movie, not a a BTTF where you can do anything just for the fun of it.

What I like the most in T2 is the fact that we really don't know in the end if they changed the future or not. They tried, and that's the important message of the movie, humans being humans they have to try to change the future if they think they can (the opposite basis of the first movie where Reese just want the future to be as it shoud be). BUT I like that it is not said if they succeeded or not. We do not see alternate timelines in the movie, it is respectful enough of the original story.
So... I would say that even if The Terminator is a perfect movie on its own, T2 is good "mirror" movie. My only "problem" being that the tone of the movie is way more family ortiented than the great horror / scifi / thriller first movie. The other T sequels I can enjoy them just like I would watch James Bond movies or fan films.  We'll see what Cameron have in store for the next one...

All that to say that, no, I don't think of one single sequel/prequel that makes me like the original less. (if I can deal with Attack of the Clones I can deal with anything!)

[Sinbad]

The Matrix

While the second was (sort of) watchable, the sheer amount of pretentious codswallop the sequels indulged in sully the original somewhat for me. If they had been made by different directors I could look at them as more separate entities but the Wachowski's completely blew it with the sequels, I don't think any amount of fan editing could ever make them into worthy sequels.

[jrWHAG42]

I was just talking to my mother the other day about the Matrix sequels. She said I was crazy for having only seen the original, that it was like Lord of the Rings. I said that it wasn't like that at all, that LOTR was one big story, you can't watch one without the others, whereas Matrix is its own stand alone movie that you could watch without any knowledge that there are sequels.
Now, I don't remember the ending to The Matrix. She was telling me that it's not resolved in the end, that it's open ended and requires the sequels. I couldn't exactly argue with that. I mean, I did, but I forget my argument.