Fourquels That Surpass

[Neon Ignition]

It's only natural that we dial up the difficulty yet again and tackle the trickier proposition of wondering on what occasions has the fourth entry into a franchise been the peak?

Same rules apply which is why I'll get this one out of the way as the sketchy nature of the franchise means that it probably doesn't qualify but I'm not 100% - Mad Max: Fury Road
(I think it's a sequel but the updated designs across the entries make it hard to track)


What fourquels are superior to the prior entries and why?

[Asura]

probably doesn't qualify but I'm not 100% - Mad Max: Fury Road

It's a literal sequel. IIRC there's a comic book which tells the story for the original 4th movie that was never made, which transitions from the end of Beyond Thunderdome to Fury Road. There's a whole story about how it was related to work on the Mad Max videogame which isn't canon due to this, and how I think there was some kind of professional falling out from that. Also disproves a fan theory that the feral kid in Mad Max 2 is Max in Fury Road.

Honestly though, I'm not sure if there are any other examples.

Maybe Captain America: the First Avenger? Technically* the 4th MCU movie and people seem to like it more than Iron Man, Iron Man 2 and Thor.

*Edward Norton Hulk makes it the 5th but that's a slightly weird one because I think that started life as not-MCU but was refit during production?

[Neon Ignition]

So are the discrepancies from the earlier films just glossed over as purely them lacking the budget to portray the world as intended?


Like, in MM1 there's no real leaning on gasoline being in such short supply, the idea of Max being a cop in a Fury Roadesque world seems daft too. It's clear in Fury Road that the world would have had to be desolate for decades as people don't even recall the fall. Yet MM1 isn't like that at all, MM2 being like that to an extent is a stretch and that's before Max's age is looked at. That's why I assumed Fury Road was more of a reboot, using the same cornerstones but delivering a version he intended without restraint

[Asura]

So are the discrepancies from the earlier films just glossed over as purely them lacking the budget to portray the world as intended?


Like, in MM1 there's no real leaning on gasoline being in such short supply, the idea of Max being a cop in a Fury Roadesque world seems daft too. It's clear in Fury Road that the world would have had to be desolate for decades as people don't even recall the fall. Yet MM1 isn't like that at all, MM2 being like that to an extent is a stretch and that's before Max's age is looked at. That's why I assumed Fury Road was more of a reboot, using the same cornerstones but delivering a version he intended without restraint

There isn't an official explanation. But I think it's like how, mostly, Bond/007 is predominantly one series even though they don't narratively make sense for that to be the case (with fans making all sorts of daft explanations, putting aside the Craig subseries which was sort-of a reboot).

The one I've seen is that each film is a story about The Road Warrior, told by someone to someone else, long after the story occurred. But that's not really borne out by the movies themselves.

But yeah; officially at least, it's considered a continuation of the same series, with the inconsistencies that invites (arguably with the biggest jump between MM and MM2) just being glossed over.

[Neon Ignition]

Nice, then we have our first contender

[QualityChimp]

This is even tougher than the threequels thread!

Thunderball isn't better than Goldfinger. Die Hard With a Vengeance isn't better than the preceding films.
Although Thor is a great threequel, Love and Thunder went hard into the silly territory and asked us to be emotional but also having farting rocks and screaming goats.

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home is a decent cinematic outing for the Enterprise crew. Is it better than the first 3?
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is great with the whimsy still there, but a step towards the washed-out colours of when the baddies take over. I prefer the time-travel whimsy of the preceding Prisoner of Azkaban.

So, I'm going to go with Rocky IV.
It's brilliant and so jingoistic. I remember shouting at the screen when I watched it as a kid.
Rocky has had some good fights, but nothing meant as much as the showdown with Drago.
It's so quotable too, and whilst watching the Fury-Usyk fight at the weekend, it wasn't Rocky 1 through 3 we were quoting...

I'm also saying Mad Max: Fury Road.
MM2 is phenomenal and that final chase it great, but holeeee moleee, Fury Road is like one giant car chase.
There's a moment at the start where Max sees people chasing through his binoculars and he eats a lizard, then it's NON-STOP until the convoy heads out into the night.
I really l like the pseudo-religion stuff in FR too. MM2 and 3 have some rituals and costumes, but the "WITNESS ME" stuff and raising the wheels feels like there's an established religion, all under the control of he who controls the water.

Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol is better than the previous 3, IMHO.
1 is good, but undoes the whole M:I team ethos. 2 is a bit silly. 3 is good but not top-tier.
Ghost Protocol starts the blueprint of the modern series after a five year gap and has got better and better. They nailed the humour too.
The Burj Khalifa sequence is more memorable than anything in the previous film and is vertigo-inducing thrills.

[Neon Ignition]

For Star Trek that title is defended by Wrath of Khan existing. With Rocky I kind of understand what people find appealing with Rocky IV in the same way as those who pick Rocky III but for me both are entertaining but much lesser films than the first two or the sixth, over simplifying the franchise.


You've absolutely diamond bulleted it to the head with Ghost Protocol though, so much better than the three before it

[Asura]

So, I'm going to go with Rocky IV.
It's brilliant and so jingoistic. I remember shouting at the screen when I watched it as a kid.
Rocky has had some good fights, but nothing meant as much as the showdown with Drago.
It's so quotable too, and whilst watching the Fury-Usyk fight at the weekend, it wasn't Rocky 1 through 3 we were quoting...

I could go for this.

Personally I've always felt there are two Rocky movies; I and IV. I is the artistic, raw, massive cinematic achievement. IV is like 80s excess given form and shape. Both are fantastic in their own way.

[QualityChimp]

Like, I don't dislike Rocky 1, it's a fascinating character piece and definitely more Oscar-worthy than IV, but the fourth film is such damn fun, I'd say it's a better cinematic event.

[Neon Ignition]

+1 Point for Drago, -1 Point for being Montage heavy, +1 Point for Apollo twitch death, -100 points for the robot


If you asked me to cut the franchise down to the perfect trilogy then 3 and 4 wouldn't stand a chance of making the cut so are out by default. There is an element of Rocky 1 being aided by Rocky 2 though which feels almost like the second half of a single story

[Finsbury Girl]

For Star Trek that title is defended by Wrath of Khan existing. With Rocky I kind of understand what people find appealing with Rocky IV in the same way as those who pick Rocky III but for me both are entertaining but much lesser films than the first two or the sixth, over simplifying the franchise.


You've absolutely diamond bulleted it to the head with Ghost Protocol though, so much better than the three before it

BAN REQUEST ; we all know MI2 is the GOAT MI

[Asura]

BAN REQUEST ; we all know MI2 is the GOAT MI

I actually love Mission Impossible 2. I think I was about 14 when I saw it.

Those two things may be related.