2nd Time Lucky: 5 Sequels That Are Better Than the Original (No.3)

3 - The Godfather; Part 2

The Plot; Michael Corleone is now the Don of New York’s most powerful gangster family. As is to be expected, being in such a position of power is not an easy street and it soon becomes clear that Michael is far from untouchable. Running parallel to the main story is the rise of the original ‘Godfather’, Vito Corleone, as the film depicts his evolution from humble immigrant to the man we saw in the first film. Meanwhile, Michael’s paranoia manifests itself in intense anger as he doesn't know whether to trust his own brother (Fredo), his capo (Frank Pentangeli) or the newest player in the game, Hyman Roth. Three hours of deception culminates in the coldest acts seen in cinema, as family ties are truly broken.

Why is it Better? This film and its predecessor have gone down in the canon of great films, and although the final installment disappoints, the entire trilogy is magnificent. However, this episode just scrapes above the original for a number of reasons. For me, it’s down to the two men who carry the story; Al Pacino as Michael and Robert De Niro as Vito. Pacino is superlative; bone chillingly-cold and calculating interspersed with fits of unparalleled rage. His transformation from honest veteran to unhinged Mafioso is incredible and I don’t think it’s over-the-top to cite his performance as one of the best ever. He’s just a bloody convincing bastard. Chuck in De Niro using amazing levels of nuanced acting when re-creating Marlon Brando’s Vito and it means that pretty much every scene features an actor on top of their game.

It’s an undeniably cool film, it looks incredibly authentic and makes killing your brother/best friends seem endlessly glamorous. The back-stabbing but strangely moral world of the Mafia may seem like a slightly clichéd genre now, but this film is one of the reasons why it became such a popular style of movie in the first place. It taught us the importance of family or rather the hypothetical importance of it (If ever you forget how important family is, just listen to Phil Mitchell on Eastenders –it’s his fall back argument). It taught us how every person can become a cold bastard, and most importantly, it taught us that you should never go fishing when you've pissed off your psychotic, mafia-running brother – Ok, that one may not apply to all of us. However, ‘The Godfather’ made us an offer we couldn't refuse; the second film sealed the deal. 

2nd Time Lucky: 5 Sequels That Are Better Than the Original (No.4)

4 ­ Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back 

Plot: After the Death Star was destroyed at the end of the first film, you may have been deceived into thinking that the Rebels had won. However, we now see that the Empire is back up and running, Hoth is under attack and the three main characters- Luke, Han and Leia - are separated. Han and Leia go on the run whereas Luke learns how to be a true 'Jedi' under the watchful eye of a familiar face. Darth Vader gets his mojo back and the film ends with the Empire being firmly in the ascendancy.  

Why is it Better? It's the daddy of action sequels. The power balance is changed wholly by the end of the film, which is both admirable and entertaining and is a firm step away from the standard model of 'Good-guys-win-in-the-end'. (Although they do eventually, shhh). It has created two of the most famous events in film history (spoilers); the encasing of Han in some space-age metal (I wasn't listening) and a Jeremy Kyle-esque reveal of who Luke's father is (You're all saying the line). The triumvirate of main characters work really well of each other; you have Leia's bullishness which plays off against Han's casual cockiness whilst Luke is growing into the role as a Jedi. 

Gone are the 'Oh My God I'm a Jedi!', 'What's a Jedi?' scenes that are in all fairness a necessity in the first scene. The whole tempo of the film is like a Western in space, which in turn makes the whole thing bouncy and fun. Don't forget as well that for the time, the special effects are excellent and create a tangible universe, even if it is so far, far away. It's a film that doesn't take itself too seriously whilst still maintaining a real sense of danger for the main characters. It's this balance that perhaps evaded the prequels (I and II in particular) and it must be an aim for JJ Abrams to re-kindle this balance when he begins filming the latest sequel next year. Overall, it's pacey, bouncy, full of memorable moments and has been used as an example for what a blockbuster sequel should be for 20 odd years, so can't be too bad. It's the type of film I would have given my hand (No offence Luke) to see at the time it was first released in the cinema.

2nd Time Lucky: 5 Sequels That Are Better Than the Original (No.5)

5 - The Hobbit; The Desolation of Smaug

Plot: After a narrow escape at the end of the first Hobbit film, the company find themselves being hunted down by those pesky orcs. Throw in some gargantuan spiders, some devious elves and a few shifty characters at Lake Town and the little heroes find themselves at the lonely mountain, where they finally meet the stupendous Smaug.

Why is it better? I hugely enjoyed the first one but here the whole thing seems to go up a notch. The pace increases and the action is majestic. In a film that centres around set pieces, the spider fight, barrel run and the encounter with the Dragon are sweeping pieces of action that are superbly shot and imagined. More importantly all of the fight scenes make me reminisce back to the halcyon days of playing ‘LOTR’ on the PS2 and beating the crap out of some orcs. It feels 'Ringsier' in tone and the nods to the LOTR series are a good thing to see. The visuals are spectacular; when Smaug rises from the glut of gold in Erebor it is wonderfully striking. Whereas in the first one you feel like you've seen it all before (the homeliness of the Shire & the beauty of Rivendell), here you witness every new place through the same doe-eyes as the dwarves and Bilbo.

More to the point, the cast have a much meatier script to deal with and the plot is simply more interesting. Thorin (Armitage) is able to delve into the character much more than in the first and the film is the better for it. For the first time you can see the light and shade to his character which in turn offsets the innocence of Bilbo. Martin Freeman is a joy to watch once again, and must be what Tolkien envisaged when he put pen to paper all of those years ago. There’s a piece of off-the-cuff comedy acting when he encounters Smaug that is quite brilliant. Moreover, his rapport with ‘Sherlock’ mucker Smaug (Voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch) is both tense and humorous in equal measure.The Elves are an entertaining aside, with Lee Pace stealing the show as the sinister Thranduil. Throw in the welcome return of Legolas (Bloom), the drop-dead-kick-ass Tauriel (Lilly), the gritty Bard (Evans) and an excellent comic turn from Stephen Fry as the mayor of Lake town and it amalgamates to create a sharp cast working in tandem with stunning visuals. In simple terms it's what I feel a blockbuster should be.

There are certainly the tell-tale signs of this being a middle film in a trilogy. There are a number of plot-lines left open and unresolved, however that happens in every 'Middle' film you can imagine so it would be harsh to call it a fault. Also, say what you will, but I thought the cliff hanger at the end was bloody epic; roll on part 3.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Without the intellect/comic genius of Iron Man, the sheer power of the Hulk nor the godly status of Thor, it would be incredibly easy to make Captain America's story a boring one. His second soiree outside of the Avengers ensemble however is Marvel's strongest solo-hero story yet.

To set the scene, Steve Rogers (Evans) is adapting slightly better to life in the present day after 70 years on ice. All is not well though, the Cap't is tired of being SHIELD's, as well as Director Fury's (Jackson), "janitor". In spite of this the Captain is shown the latest SHIELD innovation; operation insight. A system of ardent anti-terrorism is a bit too close to the bone for Rogers, as his moral compass is once again telling him that a climate of fear is not what he fought for all of those years ago in WW2. However it is the shadowy world of SHIELD itself that becomes the crux of the story and as a result, Rogers and Romanov (Johansson) are forced on the run.

Throw in a few genuinely surprising plot twists and the finale pits, in no particular order; good 

guys, bad guys, bad guys pretending to be good guys and bad guys who may just be good guys. All of this is played against the back drop of aerial battle royale not dissimilar to the middle salvo of the Avengers. The visuals are stunning in this set piece as they are throughout, with the most encouraging thing being that the Russo brothers were not overly reliant on CGI and mass destruction; a criticism that became 'Man of Steel's Achilles' heel. The addition of the 'Falcon' (Mackie) to the Evans-Johansson axis is another strength of the film, although he does feel suspiciously like the 'Patriot' in Iron Mans 2 and 3.

The irreverent brand of humour that has defined Marvel films is once again pitched just right here. Unsurprisingly, the butt of the jokes are usually the Capt and his lack of popular culture knowledge. However, it seldom feels forced. The chemistry between Romanov and Rogers is another huge strength and is a brilliant progression from the Avengers film. Whilst the only somewhat annoying aspect is the constant use of new-age technology to get the protagonists out of trouble the redeeming factor is that the beating heart of the film is a man who is firmly old-fashioned. This contrast is perhaps what makes the film so entertaining as you have a tussle between morality (Rogers) and self dubbed 'Realism' coming from the views of Fury and a thoroughly entertaining and duplicitous turn from Robert Redford as Pierce.

There are genuine thrills, spills, twists and turns in this film, which is testament to a writing team who have covered so many plots in recent years. The 'Winter soldier' himself comes as almost an intriguing sub plot to the film but does give the franchise room for maneouvre and a plot line to pursue. This summer is huge for Marvel; proven titles like X-Men and The Amazing Spider Man will be expected to deliver. However the sizeable gamble on the 'Guardians of the Galaxy' meant that this opening film of the year had to be a success. Simply, it does more than that and after the film's barnstorming finale, there is a tangible feeling that this particular Marvel universe has progressed and changed irreversibly. Therefore Captain America's second outing is smart, well paced, action packed, funny and excellently balanced. It looks like the old ways are indeed the best.

91/100