Sequels are not done for the audience or cinema or the filmmakers. It's for the distributor. The film becomes a brand.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
You do sequels because they are tent poles. They open well, and they hold the tent up. But in between, you make a movie you respect.
Audiences can be leery of sequels; the studios make a hit, they see dollar signs, and they make a cheap rip-off.
I think a sequel is a waste of money and time. I think movies should illuminate new stories.
The reason why Hollywood cranks out so many sequels and adaptations is because the audience is so overwhelmed with choices, the only way to get them in the theater is to give them something familiar.
I don't like sequels at all. If the movie's good the first time, why bother?
I think you kind of need to acknowledge that the reason why sequels do well is because people that loved the first one come back.
I never actually plan sequels. They demand to be done.
A lot of people ask for sequels, but what they really want is just to know the characters are happy and safe.
By definition a sequel can't be original. So you've got to figure out what worked the first time around.
I don't know if I would do sequels. I almost feel like when I'm done with them, they're going to have to find their own way.
No opposing quotes found.