I could never see the point of the book Ten past Eight, or the other sequels. And I've only tried to watch the film once, but didn't get even halfway through. It's a classic case to me of the utterly unneeded sequel that does slightly diminish the impact of the original.Now, as I wrote in my responses, as a youngster, I appreciated both the book and movie “2010” because it explained the first movie. Because the ending of “2001: A Space Odyssey” says different things to different people, there must have been some driving need for Clarke to Tell Us All Exactly What Everything Means. That, or the need for the next book in a contract. Or writer’s block.
Anyway, the movie/book “2010” struck I.J. as unnecessary. Are there other sequels/prequels to fantasy and SF books/movies you think are unnecessary?
I’ll answer my own question and stay with Arthur C. Clarke. Rendezvous with Rama was an excellent book filled, like "2001," with big ideas. The immediate sequel, Rama II, was the same book with different characters. But when some of the characters got marooned on Rama II and Clarke wrote two more books, I barely got through books two and three. I only finished book three just to see what the Rama craft was. I can’t remember now but I remember being unimpressed.
I’ve only read the first Dune book. I’ve heard that, starting with Book 4, Frank Hebert went off the deep end. Then there are the scads of prequel trilogies out there. Do they help or hinder your enjoyment of the original Dune books?
On the movie front, I didn’t think we needed Alien 3 or Alien 4. Well, the ending of Alien 3 was okay but #4 was excess. I didn’t like Terminator 3 either (and have yet to see the new one).
Those are the ones that come immediately to my mind. How about y’all? What are sequels/prequels to SF/F movie or books you think are unnecessary?