I believe that movie sequels are always worse than the original. Most movies are made to be stand alones, meaning that there would be a strong ending for all of the characters. A sequel is only made because the public/critics liked the first movie or for money purposes. Sequels are unnecessary additions that can involve weird/unneeded plotlines, ruin characters/character development and cause a bad ending to what would have been a great stand alone movie.

First of all, that was more than two words, second of all, you stated that it was 'decent'. Decent is not better than the original. Yes, sequels may be 'decent' but that does not make them necessary or better than the first one, my point still stands.

I've pictured it. Sitting in a movie theatre in 1991, excited for Terminator 2. Only to be disappointed that it wasn't nearly as good as the first one. In the first movie, it ended with Sarah driving away after the terminator was killed, there was no need to bring it back just because it was popular.