|
|
|
People complain about sequels, saying they're the products of a lazy, creatively bankrupt film industry and why is Sean Connery back when he had his head chopped off in the first one? But nobody stops to consider: what if there were no sequels? What if we had to live in a world where we could never again enjoy the wacky antics of James West and Artemus Gordon in Wilder Wilder West? How could we sleep at night without knowing that someone, somewhere, is working on B*A*P*S II? My God, what if 2010 had never been made? That's why we want to alert you to a threat to our way of filmgoing. Every year, films are made with titles that should have been sequels, or at least prequels, but instead are wasted on films with unfamiliar plots and characters we have no reason to care about. Shouldn't Trippin' have been followed by Falling Down? Shouldn't Run Lola Run have been followed by Ran? At least Honeymoon in Vegas came before Leaving Las Vegas, but as it turns out the movies had nothing to do with each other! We're collecting a list of these injustices, the better to drive home the point that every sequel has a right to be made. Please join us in our crusade by submitting your examples of films that should have been sequels but weren't using the form at the bottom of the page. Those submissions most helpful to the cause will be posted below. Outbreak shoud have been followed by The Cure -- L. Fitzgerald Sjöberg |
|
