Why is it that the sequals are never as good as the first?!
Question: Why is it that the sequals are never as good as the first!?
Answers:
i think its because the first movie is all about making the fans happy, and all that, and its not just for the money!.
but when theres a sequel, and its not just to keep the movie legacy going on, its about money, but thats not true all the time!.
J!.K!. Rowling wrote the Harry Potter books!. the money to her was just a bonus!. She put all of her imagination and effort into each book, and even more in the one after that!.
And in Pirates of the Caribbean, i really don't know how to put it, but both the sequels were amazing, and thats because they didn't do it just for money, and they did it for the fun of making the movie!
Money is an evil thing really!.
And the writers usually wring out their ideas on the first movie and sometimes don't have anything left to make the sequel just as good as the first!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
but when theres a sequel, and its not just to keep the movie legacy going on, its about money, but thats not true all the time!.
J!.K!. Rowling wrote the Harry Potter books!. the money to her was just a bonus!. She put all of her imagination and effort into each book, and even more in the one after that!.
And in Pirates of the Caribbean, i really don't know how to put it, but both the sequels were amazing, and thats because they didn't do it just for money, and they did it for the fun of making the movie!
Money is an evil thing really!.
And the writers usually wring out their ideas on the first movie and sometimes don't have anything left to make the sequel just as good as the first!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Never say never!. It is true that most sequels are not as good than the original movie but some have been better than the first one!. for one example many fans consider The Empire Strikes Back a better movie than Star Wars: A New Hope, or even the best movie of the series!. Other example, Prisioner of Azkaban is for many people the best HP movie so far, and it is the 3rd movie!.
Many times the sequel repeats many elements of the first one and in the second time they does not entertain the same as before!. also the expectatives of the fans demands something more, something bigger and the movie while excellent does not met those expectatives!. Probably a sequel would be judged better if not compared to the original!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Many times the sequel repeats many elements of the first one and in the second time they does not entertain the same as before!. also the expectatives of the fans demands something more, something bigger and the movie while excellent does not met those expectatives!. Probably a sequel would be judged better if not compared to the original!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Normally sequels only have a fraction of the same people working on them as the original had!. And probably the biggest reason is sequels are made to make a profit, not for an artistic reason, but simple to make as much money as possible!. To milk the cow for as much as it's worth, as it were!. No matter what the film, Pirates of the Caribbean, Star Wars, or what have you, the second one is for the money!. Star Wars really would have been only that one story, because Lucas would not have had the funding to make a second one, but the film became really successful so, the studio decided to fund the next film, and then he switched studios for the third!. Pirates had all the elements it needed in the first one to be a full film, but it became hugely successful, and the studio decided to make more!. There is no film ever made that has had a sequel that wasn't made for profit!. There is no Taxi Driver 2, there is no Citizen Kane 2, no Casablanca 2, these films were made by directors, producers, and actors that cared for cinema more than money, and there films have no sequels!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
There are a few exceptions, like "Addams Family Values!." The first one was funny, but the sequel was a!.!.!.er, scream!
Sometimes, the sequel can be disappointing, but a third installment beats the second by far, like "Indy and the Last Crusade," which was SO much better than "Temple of Doom!." Or consider "Return of the Jedi" which I liked much better than "The Empire Strikes Back!."Www@Enter-QA@Com
Sometimes, the sequel can be disappointing, but a third installment beats the second by far, like "Indy and the Last Crusade," which was SO much better than "Temple of Doom!." Or consider "Return of the Jedi" which I liked much better than "The Empire Strikes Back!."Www@Enter-QA@Com
It's very rare, but sometimes a sequel can be as good, if the director and actors don't just sell out for the bucks and they actually have a good script!.
Lethal Weapon 2
AliensWww@Enter-QA@Com
Lethal Weapon 2
AliensWww@Enter-QA@Com
I find this to be true most of the time too, except for Amityville, the second one is better!. Pet Semetary 2 is really a good movie too!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
after the first one usually the main idea has been all played out and becomes tired and done to deathWww@Enter-QA@Com
because most sequels are made just to cash in on the success of the first film!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
I know they usually never use the same people from the first one!Www@Enter-QA@Com