I watched one of the Terminator sequels last week.
Then saw a bit of Godfather 2 sequel on SBS and also saw Last Blood on streaming too.
Made me think about the whole trend of movie sequels that came into being and probably now spawned something worse again of movie franchises. The first franchise was probably the James Bond one from 60's that character the same but in different decades a new actor playing same character and probably more a reboot than a sequel. Never really got into that type of idea so not really seen any James Bond movies beyond being a kid.
As a little kid watched old movies on tv and most were stand alone movies. some genre's like Western movies with Clint Eastwood as a gunslinger as similar character but still a whole new movie and not based on same characters of a movie before.
But sequels seemed to become more popular growing up in the 80's. Maybe my first movie away from parents was a sequel. I think I saw Rocky 3 at cinema with friends which was spawned from the original Rocky movie in 1976, Maybe before then the Godfather movies and Jaws movies made sequels something to make more money from for other movie makers as an idea. Seem to be a lot of Airport series on tv, like Airport 77 and so on. Probably more a re-boot of a theme than actual sequels. Planet of the Apes had sequels , then Star Wars and in the 80's the whole crazy Police Academy series that were mostly junk. but then even great movies like Rocky than had wonderful sequels like Rocky 2 and 3 overdid it with 5 etc. that were beyond a joke bad. It looked like now they just made for money. A monster was created and by mid 90's it was almost expected. Still, plenty of good movies exist as stand alone movie. It is a shame plenty of sequels are made for profit only and not as an artistic idea from story point of view.
When I saw Last Blood last week, I thought it was ok as a movie but made me also think it would have been perfectly fine for First Blood as a movie to be a stand alone great movie for it's time and no need to make sequels. It kind of diminishes the greatness of an original as a memory if sequels are ordinary or average.
Probably when Saw got made as a cult horror movie the sequel idea was almost dis-placed by a movie brand or franchise idea as a move making business model. It seems originality has gone by wayside and franchise/brands are what mostly is cinema now.
Just random thoughts that crossed my mind in the last week.
Re-makes are probably a different thing too. Planet of Apes had sequels in late 70's ? but a whole new re-make for a different generation and not truly sequels.
I've never been into Star Wars at all but it is crazy how many generations are into it. Did not even know another was out until saw Star Wars nerds talking about it on sports shows on radio and threads dedicated to nerds upset of one made that does not fit their original franchise ideas.
Some sequels can be done where one is a flop but a series of them have too many good ones that one or two bad ones you can live with. In this sense Rocky sequels , The Matrix and The Godfather did more good than harm. It's rare though. I really did not mind Last Blood last week as the title itself highlighted he was ending his story here as a movie but I reckon First Blood just made as stand alone movie would have been more than enough for this type of character but the industry itself seem to demand more of these things. I think too many good movies have had their legacy ruined by sequels the story did not really need.
Then saw a bit of Godfather 2 sequel on SBS and also saw Last Blood on streaming too.
Made me think about the whole trend of movie sequels that came into being and probably now spawned something worse again of movie franchises. The first franchise was probably the James Bond one from 60's that character the same but in different decades a new actor playing same character and probably more a reboot than a sequel. Never really got into that type of idea so not really seen any James Bond movies beyond being a kid.
As a little kid watched old movies on tv and most were stand alone movies. some genre's like Western movies with Clint Eastwood as a gunslinger as similar character but still a whole new movie and not based on same characters of a movie before.
But sequels seemed to become more popular growing up in the 80's. Maybe my first movie away from parents was a sequel. I think I saw Rocky 3 at cinema with friends which was spawned from the original Rocky movie in 1976, Maybe before then the Godfather movies and Jaws movies made sequels something to make more money from for other movie makers as an idea. Seem to be a lot of Airport series on tv, like Airport 77 and so on. Probably more a re-boot of a theme than actual sequels. Planet of the Apes had sequels , then Star Wars and in the 80's the whole crazy Police Academy series that were mostly junk. but then even great movies like Rocky than had wonderful sequels like Rocky 2 and 3 overdid it with 5 etc. that were beyond a joke bad. It looked like now they just made for money. A monster was created and by mid 90's it was almost expected. Still, plenty of good movies exist as stand alone movie. It is a shame plenty of sequels are made for profit only and not as an artistic idea from story point of view.
When I saw Last Blood last week, I thought it was ok as a movie but made me also think it would have been perfectly fine for First Blood as a movie to be a stand alone great movie for it's time and no need to make sequels. It kind of diminishes the greatness of an original as a memory if sequels are ordinary or average.
Probably when Saw got made as a cult horror movie the sequel idea was almost dis-placed by a movie brand or franchise idea as a move making business model. It seems originality has gone by wayside and franchise/brands are what mostly is cinema now.
Just random thoughts that crossed my mind in the last week.
Re-makes are probably a different thing too. Planet of Apes had sequels in late 70's ? but a whole new re-make for a different generation and not truly sequels.
I've never been into Star Wars at all but it is crazy how many generations are into it. Did not even know another was out until saw Star Wars nerds talking about it on sports shows on radio and threads dedicated to nerds upset of one made that does not fit their original franchise ideas.
Some sequels can be done where one is a flop but a series of them have too many good ones that one or two bad ones you can live with. In this sense Rocky sequels , The Matrix and The Godfather did more good than harm. It's rare though. I really did not mind Last Blood last week as the title itself highlighted he was ending his story here as a movie but I reckon First Blood just made as stand alone movie would have been more than enough for this type of character but the industry itself seem to demand more of these things. I think too many good movies have had their legacy ruined by sequels the story did not really need.
