As a cinephile who’s spent countless nights huddled around the silver screen, I can’t help but feel a deep sense of nostalgia for some films that were either lost to time or never truly found their footing. One such movie that falls into this category is “Milo’s Return,” a follow-up that came years after its predecessor had already sailed off into obscurity. It was as if the crew set sail on a ship destined for nowhere, with the winds of fate cruelly pushing them further and further away from the shores of success.
Sci-fi movies often lead to sequels, such as those in “Star Wars” and “Star Trek”. These franchises are common in this genre, with very few hit sci-fi films being standalone productions. Typically, they have at least one sequel following their release. Although some sequels may be so poor they end the franchise, it’s generally expected that a successful sci-fi movie will inspire additional installments.
Despite being aware of this fact, some science fiction sequels slipped under the radar for many viewers – even diehard fans of the originals. Some were moderately successful but faded into obscurity over time, while others were so poorly received that they went unnoticed by most audiences. Consequently, numerous follow-ups to popular sci-fi films are often mistakenly categorized as standalone productions and, in many instances, should have been independent movies instead.
WarGames: The Dead Code
1982’s “Tron” presented a more straightforward depiction of the potential dangers of advanced AI, while “WarGames,” released a year later, approached the same theme in a manner that felt more plausible. Instead of the protagonist physically entering the digital world to combat tangible representations of the villainous AI, as seen in Disney’s sci-fi classic, “WarGames” follows a teenage hacker named David (played by Matthew Broderick) who engages in a text-based war simulation against the antagonist from this movie. But is it really just a game?
For nearly two decades after producing a novel and multiple video games, the “WarGames” series took a break. However, in 2008, an unexpected direct-to-video sequel titled “WarGames: The Dead Code” emerged. This sequel carried over the WOPR program name from the original and featured a young hacker as the main character, but beyond these elements, it differed significantly. It was unclear whether the film aimed to remake the original or serve as a true sequel, though its DVD packaging labeled it as the latter. Despite this classification, “The Dead Code” received poor reviews and failed to resonate with existing “WarGames” fans or attract new ones.
2010: The Year We Make Contact
Not every overlooked science fiction sequel skips straight to home distribution. Occasionally, they’re screened in cinemas and even garner some notice when they do, yet they still struggle to maintain the same level of popularity as their forerunners. This is true for “2010: The Year We Make Contact,” the 1984 cinema follow-up to Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 original masterpiece, “2001: A Space Odyssey,” which is often hailed as one of the greatest science fiction films ever made.
2010, unlike 2001 which was jointly written as a screenplay and novel by Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke, was based solely on Clarke’s 1982 book, “2010: Odyssey Two.” Kubrick declined to make the film version of 2010, and although Clarke approved, he did not contribute to the script as he had for 2001. Instead, writer-director Peter Hyams took on the task, creating his unique interpretation of Clarke’s work. Critics generally praised Hyams’ efforts, and the film performed well at the box office, outperforming other sci-fi films like “Dune” and “Starman,” although it could not surpass “Beverly Hills Cop” during its opening weekend.
Over time, compared to its predecessor from 2001, the movie released in 2010 didn’t live up to its legacy and is rarely mentioned alongside the original, usually just as a quick reference or footnote. New generations of science fiction film enthusiasts who revisit the genre’s history are often unaware of the existence of the 2010 film unless they specifically look for it.
The Cell 2
As a devoted admirer, I can’t help but marvel at the extraordinary journey of the artist known as Tarsem Singh (or just Tarsem, as some might say). He initially made a splash in the advertising and music video realm with his captivating visual masterpieces, even earning a Grammy for his direction of R.E.M.’s iconic “Losing My Religion” video.
Originally classified as more of a cult favorite than a blockbuster hit, “The Cell” struggled to surpass $100 million globally against a production budget of $33 million. Critics’ reactions were mixed, with accolades primarily given to the dream sequences’ visuals but less so for the scenes set in reality. Despite this, a sequel was produced nine years later, seemingly against the film’s need or merit for one.
Titled “The Cell 2,” this film, not directed by Tarsem, bears a striking resemblance to a discarded script for a horror-tinged sequel of “Saw,” rather than a true continuation of “The Cell.” However, it maintains a tenuous connection to its predecessor by featuring a psychic character who delves into the mind of the movie’s antagonist with the intention of halting him. Known as one of the worst films of 2009, “The Cell 2” made a quiet entrance and exit without much attention.
It Came From Outer Space II
Occasionally, sequels of movies can take several decades before they’re produced. For instance, the gap between the initial release of “It Came From Outer Space” and its 1996 TV sequel spanned an impressive 43 years. A common misunderstanding is that the original movie was adapted from a book by science fiction author Ray Bradbury; however, it was actually a unique story he wrote expressly for filmmaking.
In essence, though technically classified as a remake, the 1996 film was marketed as a sequel, possibly due to doubts about its ability to honor the original effectively, which by then had achieved classic status. Both movies share a common theme: a small town encountering an alien spacecraft and the subsequent impact on the community and its residents. However, while the first movie made a significant mark in filmmaking for its pioneering use of 3D technology, “It Came From Outer Space II” appeared to be a low-budget production typical of mid-’90s TV movies. Apart from a limited VHS release, the sequel has largely vanished from public view.
Lawnmower Man 2: Beyond Cyberspace
1992’s “The Lawnmower Man,” although marketed as a Stephen King adaptation, shares minimal similarities with King’s original story of the same name. The filmmakers struggled to adapt King’s narrative, so they utilized the title and some loose plot points from the source material, but primarily built the movie around an original screenplay titled “Cyber God.” Critics were unimpressed, labeling it one of Stephen King’s worst films. However, due to its innovative use of computer animation, it gained a cult following. The story follows Jobe Smith (Jeff Fahey), a gardener who transforms into a fully digital being and uses cyberspace to commit murders.
If it wasn’t for its striking visuals and the buzz generated by Stephen King’s lawsuit against the movie’s producers for exploiting the title of one of his works, ‘The Lawnmower Man’ might have faded into obscurity. Therefore, it’s hardly shocking that it has a sequel that’s also overlooked.
In “Lawnmower Man 2: Beyond Cyberspace,” Matt Frewer replaced Fahey as the main antagonist, Jobe. As suggested by its title, Jobe’s influence expanded beyond just the cyber world, making his physical presence more prevalent. Although this change might have been made for financial reasons, it significantly diminished the appeal of the sequel compared to the original, and it turned out to be a major box office failure.
S. Darko
Initially, ‘Donnie Darko’ didn’t do well at the box office due to its release timing, which coincided with the September 11th terrorist attacks and a plane crash being significant plot points. However, it gained a passionate following on home video and through later theatrical re-releases. The complex narrative about a high school student who possibly has time control abilities and encounters a mysterious figure in a rabbit mask named Frank resonated with a new wave of cinephiles. Furthermore, it contributed to the rise of the Gyllenhaal siblings, Jake and Maggie, as stars.
The film became incredibly successful, leading to a spin-off being created in 2009 by producers, without the original writer-director Richard Kelly’s participation. Known as “S. Darko”, this sequel focuses on Samantha (Daveigh Chase), Donnie’s younger sister who is now 18 and appears to possess similar abilities. Critics panned it, audiences disliked it, and many fans chose not to watch it due to the absence of Kelly and the original cast members. In 2017, Kelly declared that he hadn’t seen “S. Darko” yet and had no intention of doing so, further stating that the movie wasn’t endorsed by him and that he played no role in its production.
Cocoon: The Return
If you had cable television during the late 1980s, you might recall that the science fiction comedy-drama “Cocoon” seemed to play frequently. This is understandable since the film was both touching and suitable for all ages. The plot revolved around the residents of a retirement home who stumbled upon a means to halt aging – a swimming pool which turned out to be utilized by a group of aliens to rejuvenate their own energy. Over time, these retirees encountered the aliens, who proposed taking them back to their home planet in exchange for immortality.
The movie titled “Cocoon” was both a commercial success and received critical acclaim, earning Oscars not just for visual effects but also for Don Ameche’s exceptional performance. Three years later, the sequel, “Cocoon: The Return,” hit theaters, bringing back the aliens from the original film, who had taken humans with them to their planet in the first movie’s conclusion.
Cocoon: The Return” didn’t receive the same positive critical reviews or financial success as the initial movie, nor did it enjoy a resurgence in popularity on television like the original did over time. While the original “Cocoon” may not be frequently rewatched these days, those who do watch it typically avoid pairing it with its sequel, which was seen as a letdown and unnecessary.
Cyborg 2
Angelina Jolie initially gained recognition through her role in the 1995 cyber-thriller “Hackers”, which also starred her future husband Jonny Lee Miller. However, this wasn’t her first appearance on the big screen. As a child of seven, she made a minor appearance in her father Jon Voight’s 1982 comedy “Lookin’ to Get Out”. Yet, it was more than a decade later when she solidified her presence in Hollywood with the lead role in the sci-fi action film “Cyborg 2”.
It seems that not many people are familiar with Angelina Jolie appearing in an action movie alongside Elias Koteas, Jack Palance, and Billy Drago, which was produced two years before “Hackers”. This only goes to show how obscure the film “Cyborg 2” really is. Initially, this film served as a platform for Jean-Claude Van Damme in 1989, where he played Gibson, a bodyguard who had to safeguard a woman named Pearl from a band of mercenaries led by a villain called Fender. And yes, the absurd names related to musical equipment don’t stop with just those characters.
Although “Cyborg” wasn’t a blockbuster success, it performed better than expected given its limited budget and received enough positive feedback to warrant a theatrical follow-up. A third installment, released directly to video, concluded the “Cyborg” trilogy. However, Van Damme was absent from both sequels, and Angelina Jolie did not reprise her role in “Cyborg 3: The Recycler.
The Butterfly Effect 2
Following several years in romantic comedies, Ashton Kutcher shifted his movie career towards more dramatic roles, starting with “The Butterfly Effect” in 2004. This science fiction thriller featured Kutcher as Evan Treborn, a college student who realized that his periodic absences were actually instances of time travel within his own past. In keeping with the film’s name, which refers to the idea that even minor actions like a butterfly flapping its wings can eventually lead to significant events such as storms, Evan attempted to alter aspects of his past for honorable motives but encountered all the unforeseen negative repercussions of those modifications.
The film “The Butterfly Effect” and Ashton Kutcher’s acting in it drew mixed reactions from critics. Despite this, the movie was successful at the box office. A follow-up was produced only two years later, which is quick for a film with an entirely new cast. However, the quality of “The Butterfly Effect 2” suffered as a result, and it didn’t receive a U.S. theatrical release. In fact, it failed to gross more than $1 million worldwide in the territories where it was distributed.
It still somehow managed nearly $3 million in DVD sales despite very little marketing, which was enough to commission another entry, “The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations,” in 2009. But within a few years, the “Butterfly Effect” trilogy was all but forgotten, with fond memories of even the original being fairly few and far between.
Atlantis: Milo’s Return
It’s not shocking that a sequel for “Atlantis: The Lost Empire” wasn’t produced given the common practice of Disney to only create direct-to-video sequels for movies that performed well initially, and this one did not. While it made $186 million globally in 2001, which might seem respectable at first glance, it underperformed significantly considering its production budget was $120 million. Taking into account marketing expenses and other costs, “Atlantis” unfortunately failed to turn a profit.
Disney originally intended to expand the “Atlantis” franchise, with an animated show and elaborate attractions at Disneyland and Walt Disney World. However, these plans were scrapped after the movie didn’t perform well financially. The company attempted to recover some of the costs by transforming three episodes initially meant for the series into the direct-to-video film “Atlantis: Milo’s Return” in 2003.
As a gamer reminiscing about my childhood, I can’t help but reflect on “Milo’s Return,” a sequel that seemed destined for obscurity. Released two years late, it was like a ship setting sail when the tide had turned – doomed to drown in the depths. The unfortunate timing didn’t help, as it came out during a decade overflowing with direct-to-video Disney follow-ups. Even the most legendary properties were swept away by the wave of sequels that never made it to the big screen.
Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation
The movie “Starship Troopers” was one that many viewers found hard to understand when it initially came out. It was directed by Paul Verhoeven and written by Edward Neumeier, who also collaborated on the film “RoboCop,” another production that was initially underappreciated but later recognized for its satirical commentary. Although some people saw “Starship Troopers” as a straightforward sci-fi action flick, they were left unsatisfied because of this interpretation. However, similar to “RoboCop,” the movie was eventually viewed as a critique of its themes – specifically fascism and the militarization of society – instead of glorifying them, and is now appropriately regarded as a cult classic.
Regrettably, the follow-up films strayed from the initial concept. “Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation” opted for an action-packed approach, focusing on soldiers battling colossal alien insects. This leaves one questioning if it was Verhoeven’s unique direction that infused the first movie with satire, or if Neumeier intended a straightforward narrative from the start. However, sticking to the script didn’t prove successful, and “Starship Troopers 2” faced harsh criticism from critics. In an attempt to revive the satirical elements, “Starship Troopers 3: Marauder” was produced, but it failed to live up to its undervalued predecessor, with the second film having already left a lasting impact.
Escape from L.A.
1996 saw the near ubiquity of “Escape from L.A.”, the sequel to John Carpenter’s 1981 cult hit, “Escape from New York”. With an aggressive marketing campaign, it was hard not to notice its billboards on highways or commercials on TV. The excitement grew as Kurt Russell reprised his iconic role as Snake Plissken, a sci-fi antihero, a rare occurrence for Russell who seldom appears in sequels – a fact that remains true even in the later stages of his seven-decade career.
Why does “Escape from L.A” appear on a list of overlooked sci-fi sequels? The movie didn’t perform well at the box office, and it’s easy to bypass when revisiting director John Carpenter’s work. Since it seldom appears on streaming platforms, many viewers might miss it entirely. Despite this, Carpenter has always expressed fondness for the film, and among his works, there are definitely some that are less impressive. However, it failed to resonate with the cultural zeitgeist and hasn’t achieved the same cult following as its predecessor. Still, among all the movies on this list, “Escape from L.A” is arguably the one least deserving of being overlooked or forgotten.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-09-08 14:30