top of page

Say no to sequels

by EMILY SZPAK Staff Writer

Lately, it seems all of our favorite movies are coming out with sequels, such as “Anchor Man 2” and “The Hangover III”. Classics are being rewritten to tell us another tale, bringing the same characters back to life. However, is it ever worth it, or are they just making the first movie worse?

Sure, it is exciting to see your favorite characters back in action, but how could it possibly live up to the expectations? Part of the whole thrill of a movie is meeting new characters and not knowing what is going to happen next. The bar for the movie is already set so high, it cannot compare to the first.

I am not sure how “The Hangover III” is going to be, but judging by “The Hangover II”, there are not high hopes for it. “The Hangover” was hilarious, taking in almost all good reviews, and everyone has seen it. “The Hangover” was raunchy and has great potential to be a classic.

When everyone heard of part 2, there was a frenzy of fans planning big things for this movie. If the first one was hilarious, the second one should be too, right? Wrong.

I was less than impressed with “The Hangover II”. The story just gets old. “The Hangover” was maxed out with its jokes and story, and doing it all over again was too much. I know it was not as successful as part one; however, it must have been somewhat intriguing because for some reason they decided to get another one out of it, which came out May 24, 2013.

“It was alright, not as good as the first,” says sophomore Carrie Earl.

Whenever I hear sequel, I think really successful movie writers have writer’s block and cannot think of anything new. What makes a movie good is that there is nothing else like it, or at least has not been for a while. Do not juice a movie and try to get everything out of it that you can. Start fresh, let go, and let your legend live on.

Speaking of legend, it seems there are plans to make the legend of Ron Burgundy live on. This in particular worries me. “Anchor Man” was one of my favorite movies and still is. That stupid humor never fails to get a laugh out of me.

I get the fact that it has been nine years and it is bringing something great back. They are not planning a fourth while releasing a third, like “Iron Man”, I will give them that, but sequels just do not have the odds in their favor.

“Anchor Man” was funny and quotable, and America loved it. Do not get me wrong, I am excited to see the gang get back together, but you cannot blame me for being apprehensive of the second not living up to the first.

“It’s true, [sequels] never live up to my expectations,” says sophomore Michelle Barclay.

It would be impossible for me to go into detail about every movie that was just awful, so here is a list of them. • “Lion King” 2 and ½ was pathetic • “Mean Girls 2” was an hour and a half of my life wasted • “Legally Blonde 2” had no purpose • “Step Up” 2, 3, 4 and then a 5TH to be announced, when will they stop dancing? • “Dumb and Dumberer” was dumbererer • “Grease 2”, how dare they • ANY Disney/Pixar movie they decided to continue • “Shrek” 2, 3, 4… however many they made

There is a strong distinction between stupid sequels, and movies made to continue. If you know from day one, and make the movie around the fact that this story will continue, it is fine, like any book series, and perhaps superhero series.

case in point, “Kick Ass 2.” The end of the movie was set up for a sequel! Leave the movie on a cliffhanger and you can write another one.

Also, horror movies do not really fall under sequels that are not good, because America loves to watch people die over and over again.

Basically, my point is that movie sequels should not be made, excluding all that fall under any specific category I mentioned. Note that prequels, spin-offs, and remakes should also not be made and are subject to criticism, but I am not going to get into that.

Can you name one sequel you actually liked? I bet you can’t.

0 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page