Posts Tagged ‘Sequels’

There’s an interesting phenomenon that occurs when a movie becomes a box office hit.  The people involved in the project get an idea (in my opinion it’s mostly greed- motivated) that perhaps a sequel would be a good idea.  They try to tap into what made their first movie a hit to begin with and expound on it in some way which allows for greater entertainment of audience members and more revenue, etc. etc.

However, in terms of science fiction movie sequels, I hope I’m not the only one that often feels disappointed after subjecting myself to one.  This is what happened when I first saw The Matrix and loved it:   I heard that a sequel was coming out and thought to myself, “Wow!  I can’t wait to see the continuation of this!”  Then I bought my (overly priced) movie ticket, took my seat and waited for the film to start.  What happened next though actually happens more often than not in this genre– I quickly discover that I’m utterly disappointed and left wondering how I can get the 2 hours of my life back that was wasted watching such a horrid film.

I’m not complaining about any movie in particular (that I am willing to admit that the subsequent sequels to The Matrix were terrible, the second only being slightly better than the third).  I’m just discussing the phenomenon that is sequels and how, for the most part, Hollywood rarely seems to get it right.  Is it worth giving audience members a watered down version of the original in order to bring in even more hordes of cash?  I mean, The Matrix, Ghostbusters, Men In Black, Jurassic Park and others didn’t even NEED a sequel.  They would’ve been fine if left to how they ended.

And let’s bring this to another level – how about all of the Harry Potter movies?   And Twilight?   Yes, the books have sequels but does that mean that Hollywood was obligated to make sequels of these original movies as well?  This is highly subjective.  I mean, I love all of the Underworld movies, and I’m also a big fan of the Prophecy line — but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the sequels were necessary.   Of course I feel they were, but there’s that subjectivity again…

Of course, there are those movies that are exceptions to this particular rule.  Could you even possibly imagine Star Wars without its ever-loved and popular sequels?  I think not.  How about Alien without Aliens, or Terminator without T2: Judgment Day?  Would the world have been a better place if these sequels had never been produced?  Arguably not.  These movies had what it takes to continue beyond the original and capture the audience’s interest.

As for a movie that could’ve (and perhaps should’ve) been continued but hasn’t thus far –The Last Airbender had continuing chapters in its anime form, and yet only one chapter made it into the box office (and it didn’t suck nearly as bad as the critics said it did).  Highly disappointing.

What magic causes some sequels to be successful while others fail?  Is it due to the writers, the producers, the cast, the FX team or is it more of a collaboration between them all that ties everything together?  I believe there’s more than likely a chemistry that comes into play; a formula which almost guarantees the success of sequels to a box office hit. I’ve come to the conclusion that (like I said earlier) it’s completely subjective.  If the movies don’t make oodles of money, no sequel is made.  If it does, then it will be stretched out to the maximum, redone ad nauseum.  Greed-motivated, as I said earlier.

I don’t know what the actual equation is, but I do hope that Hollywood figures it out soon.  Either that or they’d better learn to quit while they’re ahead and leave some original movies alone.

But that’s just my opinion… I want to hear from you.  How do you feel about all of this?  Are there movies you wish had sequels or never had them at all?  Comment below!