TGWTG User Blogs

Sequels are very interesting things. Most of the time, they're either VERY VERY good, or DISGUSTINGLY terrible. Usually a sequel works if it manages to further advance the plot and development of the main characters. For example, a movie like The Dark Knight worked because it gave more depth to the character of Batman/Bruce Wayne and added more elements to the world of Gotham.

However, a movie like Resident Evil: Extinction or Spy Kids 2 just makes you hang your head in shame. If the original was bad, why would Hollywood feel the need to make another one? Well, the obvious answer there is money, but I won't get into that.

Now...there's a fine line between a good and a bad sequel. Yet, it seems like there's different subgenres for a "bad" sequel. Its almost as if theres a few different kinds of "bad:"

• Not good
• Un-needed
• Just plain embarassing

Which leads me into my main topic...the straight-to-video 'sequels' that Disney churns out. Warning: If you suffer from a weak stomache, please hit the "BACK" button on your browser now.

First things first: I love Disney. I really do. I grew up watching Disney movies and TV shows, playing with toys based on their characters, and going to Disneyland every year or two. To put it simply -- Disney kicks ass.

And what's not to love? Disney puts emphasis on family fun. They create entertainment that's intelligent, teaches morals, and features good clean family-friendly comedy. It's pretty much every parents DREAM. With a Disney production, you could always assume that it was made of pure quality.

Well....at least until the mid 90's, anyway.

In 1992, a little movie by the name of Aladdin was released. Maybe you've heard of it? It was highly successful for Disney and brought them in a TON of money. Thus, they decided to make an animated TV series based on it. And what better way to kick off the series than with a sequel to the movie?

Only...this wasn't an ordinary sequel. Disney decided to put out a more...made-for-TV quality film. And boy, can you tell. The end result, The Return Of Jafar, was released in 1994 on VHS. For the record, this movie isn't that bad. Growing up, both my brother and I both loved it, actually.

The writing's as good as the TV series ever was and the songs are catchy enough. However, there are two big big big big BIG BIG BIG HIDEOUSLY big problems.

1. In the original movie, comedian Robin Williams did the voice of Aladdin's genie. He improvised a lot in the recording studio which made the movie a LOT funnier. Sadly, Disney apparently broke some type of deal they had with him, so he refused to come back to voice Genie in part 2. Disney's solution? Get Dan Castellaneta to do the voice. The end product basically sounds like Homer Simpson doing a bad Robin Williams impression. Oh, and he sings too.
2. The animation is very ugly. Its supposed to be a MOVIE  and the animation was below TV standards. While doing research, I read that all the animation was done in two seperate countries, with each country doing about half the movie. You can actually tell where the other country's animation kicks in too -- after one scene, Aladdin's outfit COMPLETELY changes.

Return Of Jafar did really well. It sold a lot, and the TV series became huge on the Disney channel. What's the natural next step? To make more sequels! To make a sequel to every Disney movie out there!

Each and every single one of these "sequels" (I use that term loosely) follows the same formula: Main character from original film has a son or daughter, the main character warns said son/daughter about bad things in life, the son/daughter goes through the SAME EXACT events that the main character did in the first movie (only with 'new' characters).

So, basically, you pay for the a watered down, less original, unfunny, crappily written knock-off of the original movie. Ugh!

There's one sequel that I particularly remember for being bad -- An EXTREMELY Goofy Movie. Before I talk about this film, lets think about it for a second. In the early 90's, there was a TV show called Goof Troop. It was about Goofy raising his young son, Max. Then came A Goofy Movie, the film version of the TV series. And THEN there was An EXTREMELY Goofy Movie. Isn't this all a bit excessive?

Anyway, AEGM is about Max's freshman year in college where Goofy joins him and becomes part of Max's rival fraternity. Yeah. I know. Screams "Classic Disney fun," doesn't it?

This whole movie is just pointless. I guess they were aiming for the slapstick humor from the classic Goofy cartoons, but...having Goofy and his son skateboarding at the X-Games just...is NOT...a good idea. What were they thinking?

They've even made direct-to-video sequels TO THIER DIRECT-TO-VIDEO SEQUELS! There's been like eighteen Beauty And The Beast movies, and there's two Lion King sequels -- The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (read: The Lion King II: Same Movie, Only With A Girl Main Character This Time and Timon & Pumba Aren't As Funny) and The Lion King 1 1/2.

People aren't as stupid as Disney would like to think they are. People can see that all these "sequels" are just made for a quick buck as cash-ins on famous names. Nobody likes these movies and they just bring down Disney's credibity. Why do they continue to make them?

However! Something happened somewhat recently to prove to me that there IS, in fact, a God. Disney announced that, due to poor sales (I think?), they will cease to make direct-to-video sequels to their theatrical releases.

Maybe one day we can all forget about these horrible "sequels" and remember what Disney was all about: Pure family fun.