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.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
By definition a sequel can't be original. So you've got to figure out what worked the first time around.
I pointedly avoid doing sequels, since for the most part I find that a sequel rarely stands up to the original.
The only reason ever to make a sequel is to spend more time with the characters that people love: to tell more of their story.
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!
I think a sequel is a waste of money and time. I think movies should illuminate new stories.
I don't write any kind of sequel or remake.
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.
Maybe because I'm a child of the '80s, but for me, a sequel is a story that follows the previous one, and sometimes if you haven't seen the original, then you don't understand the second one. Like 'Back to the Future 2.' If you haven't seen the first one, you're not going to get anything out of 'Back to the Future 2.'
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.
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.
No opposing quotes found.