Sequels

[mascott]

In all of the years that I have been looking at them, along with the many attempts to produce sequels - there really hasn't been a whole lot of success. That is, unless you look at it from the studio and their money side.
The James Bond - 007 series is far and away the most successful set of sequels. Yet, I would place Bourne I & II next. For me there hasn't been much else.

[Potato]

I liked X2 better than the first. X3 stunk though.

The second Pirates movie stunk too, but it's not like the first was real high-quality either. It was a nice popcorn flick.


The thing is, the studio finds a formula, and milk it for all it's worth.... and then some. Just think of The Land Before Time series.

[mascott]

I do agree somewhat with your X movies. The fault in the Pirates movies, lies in what is being created for Johnny Depp. Go back to Edward Scissorhands and you will see films produced for children. Kid's flicks don't have to be good, just hold their attention and add a little something spectacular.
Regarding the caveman flicks - YUK!!

[shawners]

Usually sequels are messy thing to get involved with, and whats worst is the sequel doesnt tie everything up. So they make a third installment to tie up all the events and put it in a pretty package for you. Plus they can sell trilogies and market tons of crap with it.