Quote Originally Posted by Mordar View Post
Rogue One and Red Dragon were good.
Rogue One is definitely a prequel, and definitely was good. SW is tricky though, because technically any and every series/film set prior to the end point in RoS now counts as a prequel. So Mandalorian is a prequel (which was definitely good, at least the first two seasons). Ahsoka is a prequel (not so good). Andor is also most definitely a prequel (and good), regardless of where we decide to stick our timeline pin in.

Point of order on Red Dragon. The book came out in 1981, a good 7 years before the Silence of the Lambs novel (which was specifically written as a sequel to Red Dragon). And.... even if we're just looking at films, "Manhunter" came out in 1986 (which was the original film version of Red Dragon). Note that this means that there was a film version of Red Dragon before both the book Silence of the Lambs (writtten in 1988) *and* the film Silence of the Lambs (1991).

Dont get me wrong. The film actually titled "Red Dragon" is vastly superior to Manhunter and should be considered the version to watch (and it uses Hopkins as Hannibal, and a brilliant performance by Edward Norton). But yeah... It is not a prequel via any method we could use to apply the term. It's a remake of the original (a much much better remake).

If we're talking thriller books made into films later, there are a ton of very very good prequels in the Jack Ryan related books by Tom Clancy. Patriot Games, while subtle to detect, is a prequel to Hunt for Red October (and both the books and films were released in order to make Patriot Games a prequel). Ryan is first offered a job to work for the CIA in Patriot Games, and is working as an analyst in Hunt for Red October, and his past working with the UK is more relevant in the book than in the film. To be fair, both books and films can be read/watched in any order and it doesn't matter (very small details are all that's there). Without Remorse, on the other hand, was written specifically as a prequel, and shows it (and is also an excellent book). Sadly, the film version is basically a completely different/new continuity, so we can't really call it a prequel to anything. It wasn't as good as the book (and frankly, other than the title and character names had absolutely nothing in common with the book, so...).


While I"m not sure it counts (for a couple reasons), the Babylon 5 film "In the Beginning" is kind of a prequel? It's technically set chronologically after the series and other films, but it's literally Molari telling a story about what happened during the Earth-Miinbari war (and I think it's good, so there's that). But it's a spin off film from a series, so I'm not sure it qualifies on that ground either.

I could probably think of some more. I think that prequels are as likely to be "as good as the original' as sequels. In some cases, they make a great film, have options for more, so they make more and the quality suffers (and will whether it's a prequel or sequel). Other times? Either could be a an excellent work. Usually, it depends on whether the film project is just about cashing in on a hot commodity, or they're actually approaching it as a separate project, building on another, and they really want to make it great.