you right but you have to amite that the original was the best

How does any sequel ruin its original? I just can't see how that's possible. Even if the sequel is the worst movie ever made, that doesn't take away from the fact the original is still a great movie. I love the original "Scream", one of my all-time favorite movies, but I didn't really care for the sequels as much. However, that doesn't mean that #1 isn't still a damn good movie in my mind.

It's like what an author (Stephen King, I think) said once in response to someone asking about the bad movies being made off of his books ruining his work.
"It didn't ruin them, they're still there on the shelf."

most
 

most movies shouldnt have a second part

I don't mind sequels if they still have a story to tell. That's a large factor why T3 was not needed. Cameron himself said that he was finished telling the story.

Shit I like T3 more than T2.... But nothing is better than the first... :-)

Wow, you got BIG balls for saying that Ritual.:D

Just I never liked T2 when it came out.. and I really wasnt interesting about seeing T3 until I watched it.. It is okay but not great... Like I mentioned nothing like the first one.. oh and thanx yeah I got some big balls LOL :-)

thats cool its your opinion so im not just bitching but i think t2 is the best then t1after that, t3 i thought just sucked.

Now, I'm not saying this as though I hated ALL the sequels, but I do get the feeling that A nightmare on Elm st would have had more impact, and acheived even more of a cult status if it were left on it's own...