The first is that instead of writing a sequel, which is what most people do, this is in fact a prequel. Although we didn't know that when we began the process.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
By definition a sequel can't be original. So you've got to figure out what worked the first time around.
When I am making a sequel, it needs to be different from what you have already seen. Yet, it needs to maintain a certain discipline so that people still associate it with the prequel.
The only reason I would write a sequel is if I were struck by an idea that I felt to be equal to the original. Too many sequels diminish the original.
The biggest difference in writing a sequel is that now there are expectations. But also - and this is the awesome part - now there are fans, too!
When you're writing for a sequel and there's a movie that's been deemed sacred ground by the fanbase that's the predecessor, you cannot do anything to tread on that, so it's a bit trickier than just being able to sit down and write something.
When a movie becomes very successful, it's automatic that people will start thinking a sequel, a prequel, a quel-quel.
I pointedly avoid doing sequels, since for the most part I find that a sequel rarely stands up to the original.
My gut feeling about sequels is that they should be premeditated: You should try to write a trilogy first or at least sketch out a trilogy if you have any faith in your film.
I think sequels should be earned and we won't do it unless the script is better than the first one.
I never actually plan sequels. They demand to be done.
No opposing quotes found.