While it is common for the second film in a series to ruin the franchise, many of them MAKE the franchise; such is the case with Kill Bill and The Dark Knight Trilogy. Perhaps these films' sequels were so monumental because they were planned out to take place over three films or two films, rather than the corporate industry suits just wanting to force, say, another Iron Man onto the screen to make more money. These turn into hollow films.
Maybe add some specifity, such as, what is it exactly that makes these sequels so integral to 'make' or 'break' a series? Is there a common theme that you're looking for between all successful/popular series? If not, it would definitely be easier to choose one series (eg. The Dark Knight trilogy) and pick apart each film to understand why the whole series is better than each movie alone. – Suman8 years ago
prolly ought to throw empire strikes back in there, too. – Richard Marcil8 years ago
I think of Harry Potter, though some might be shaking their heads, as each future installment was just as good, if not better. As for the Godfather...maybe we shouldn't say trilogy, as the 3rd installment was so horrific and a horrible note to end such a powerful cinematic experience. With that being said, The Godfather II, was phenomenal and better than the 1st. Interestingly,yet on a separate note, the book, The Godfather, is horrible and reads much like a soap opera. I took a course called film and literature, where books were compared to the films, and this was the only book that was far inferior to the film. – danielle5778 years ago
"Amen" to the Godfather sequel. (Tongue firmly planted in cheek): "There was a third Godfather movie?" I've never seen the third one, but went to happy hour with a friend who explained a particularly horrible scene from the third one. According to him, Pacino is a yeller and Garcia is a whisperer (or vice-versa, it's been a while). I had to ask why that was bad, so he acted out both parts while humors poured from my eyes. Someday I'll watch it for another laugh. The second one, though, I watch for the romance of the gorgeous scenes in Italy, his beautiful Italian wife, and the explanation of Vito's motivation. "Citizen" who? – Tigey8 years ago
It may be worth distinguishing that some sequels aren't appreciated because they're shoved down our throats in that (lucrative) format i.e. The hobbit into three. Whereas the ones that can legitimately claim to further a bigger narrative, and are sanctioned through genuine demand tend to cause less upset. I think it's a terribly insular trend however, who needs another Ice Age??
It would be interesting to cover some of the studio politics in how these films subsidise a decline in movie going, so they attempt to reel you back with stories/characters you know well rather than risk new/interesting films that won't take as much as a superhero film. It would be good to include a European example of a trilogy like the Three Colours films, where they are unified by theme not character or narrative. The European tradition of a trilogy tends to work much more allusively, and I would argue offer a lot more than the Hollywood style which tends to just give our favourites more screen time. – JamieMadden8 years ago
Please include Terminator 2 as one of the best sequels of all time. BTW using the phrase "of all time" just reminds me of Kanye. – Munjeera8 years ago
Just a general note that this topic seems too subjective and broad. Also specify if these are film sequels or book sequels in the title. – rowenachandler8 years ago