Making a sequel to a successful movie used to be like making a sex tape--
It's a bad idea, but people keep doing it anyway.
Now, however, it seems like Hollywood is finally learning the rules of making a good sequel.
What are they?
Well, here's what we know now that apparently we didn't before:
Rule Number One: Plan the sequel before you do the first film.
Studios have a much better idea now of what's going to do well at the box office. That means they're prepared when a movie like "Batman Begins" takes off, so they're able to make contracts to line up the original cast before the first movie even opens.
Rule Number Two: About that cast...
It took a few decades, but producers finally learned that audiences actually DO care to see the same characters and actors from the first movie. The only notable exceptions to this would be Batman and Bond, but even then, the box office could be directly applied to how well the actors fit the parts. Christian Bale as Batman? Big hit. George Lazenby as Bond? Not so much.
Pretty Big Sidenote: If you can get the original director, do it. The Spiderman phenomenon owed more to Sam Raimi than I think the studio realized. Let's see how that whole Spiderman-back-in-high-school thing works out...
Rule Number Three: Move forward, not backward.
A few years ago, studios found a loophole when they couldn't get original casts back together--
Prequels.
Call it what you want, but a prequel is just a sequel in cheap studio clothing. Hollywood rationalized that if George Lucas could do it with Star Wars, then they could do it with The Flintstones.
No, no, and no.
What they failed to realize was that a prequel calls for even better and more clever writing than ordinary sequels, and so most of those films weren't just bad--they were epic failures.
And just what would they have done if the film had succeeded?
A sequel to a prequel?
Let's leave that to the brilliant people over at Lost.
Rule Number Four: Let the fans ask you for a sequel.
Michael Patrick King was recently interviewed about the Sex and the City sequel, and he talked about how going to see the movie became a party for groups of girlfriends all over the country. He didn't want the party to stop, and so he came up with the sequel.
I have to admit, that's a pretty damn good reason to write a sequel to a movie that truly did not need to exist in the first place.
In all sincerity, if the fans are willing to come back for more, give them what they want. Nobody ever got sick of Sigourney Weaver as Ripley, and I can still make a pretty damn good argument for a Goonies sequel.
(Their KIDS go on an adventure! See? See how simple that is?)
I've also been begging for a Jurassic Park 4 for years. I know it would be bad. I don't care.
That's why they call it a guilty pleasure.
Rule Number Five: Sequels rarely work--what works are franchises.
There aren't that many good stand-alone sequels, but there are quite a few exceptional trilogies, and even more fantastic franchises. For some reason, a follow-up to a successful movie seems odd unless the plan is to stretch it out even further. The word "sequel" still seems sort of lame, but "trilogy" just reeks of legitimacy. Now when a movie hits it big, there's not just talk of a sequel, but of at least four sequels after it.
Now there's one last question I know you're all asking:
Does it take away from the original to have a follow-up?
I guess I'll tell you once I see that Goonies sequel...
It's a bad idea, but people keep doing it anyway.
Now, however, it seems like Hollywood is finally learning the rules of making a good sequel.
What are they?
Well, here's what we know now that apparently we didn't before:
Rule Number One: Plan the sequel before you do the first film.
Studios have a much better idea now of what's going to do well at the box office. That means they're prepared when a movie like "Batman Begins" takes off, so they're able to make contracts to line up the original cast before the first movie even opens.
Rule Number Two: About that cast...
It took a few decades, but producers finally learned that audiences actually DO care to see the same characters and actors from the first movie. The only notable exceptions to this would be Batman and Bond, but even then, the box office could be directly applied to how well the actors fit the parts. Christian Bale as Batman? Big hit. George Lazenby as Bond? Not so much.
Pretty Big Sidenote: If you can get the original director, do it. The Spiderman phenomenon owed more to Sam Raimi than I think the studio realized. Let's see how that whole Spiderman-back-in-high-school thing works out...
Rule Number Three: Move forward, not backward.
A few years ago, studios found a loophole when they couldn't get original casts back together--
Prequels.
Call it what you want, but a prequel is just a sequel in cheap studio clothing. Hollywood rationalized that if George Lucas could do it with Star Wars, then they could do it with The Flintstones.
No, no, and no.
What they failed to realize was that a prequel calls for even better and more clever writing than ordinary sequels, and so most of those films weren't just bad--they were epic failures.
And just what would they have done if the film had succeeded?
A sequel to a prequel?
Let's leave that to the brilliant people over at Lost.
Rule Number Four: Let the fans ask you for a sequel.
Michael Patrick King was recently interviewed about the Sex and the City sequel, and he talked about how going to see the movie became a party for groups of girlfriends all over the country. He didn't want the party to stop, and so he came up with the sequel.
I have to admit, that's a pretty damn good reason to write a sequel to a movie that truly did not need to exist in the first place.
In all sincerity, if the fans are willing to come back for more, give them what they want. Nobody ever got sick of Sigourney Weaver as Ripley, and I can still make a pretty damn good argument for a Goonies sequel.
(Their KIDS go on an adventure! See? See how simple that is?)
I've also been begging for a Jurassic Park 4 for years. I know it would be bad. I don't care.
That's why they call it a guilty pleasure.
Rule Number Five: Sequels rarely work--what works are franchises.
There aren't that many good stand-alone sequels, but there are quite a few exceptional trilogies, and even more fantastic franchises. For some reason, a follow-up to a successful movie seems odd unless the plan is to stretch it out even further. The word "sequel" still seems sort of lame, but "trilogy" just reeks of legitimacy. Now when a movie hits it big, there's not just talk of a sequel, but of at least four sequels after it.
Now there's one last question I know you're all asking:
Does it take away from the original to have a follow-up?
I guess I'll tell you once I see that Goonies sequel...
Comments
Post a Comment