'Mad Max' sequel in the works Hollywood Reporter Take a look at an interesting article we found.
The "Twilight" sequel: werewolves and heartbreak CNN Take a look at an interesting article we found.
Dracula sequel goes back to source CBC News Take a look at an interesting article we found.
In banning bullfights in Barcelona are we losing something far more important?
October 30, 2009
Figured this would be a good day to discuss sequels since I assumed Hollywood would spring "Halloween 45" on us and we could get rid of Halloween at the same time.
Of course, I should have realized it’s not that easy to get rid of Halloween.
(How exactly do you remove sprayed cobwebs from a rhododendron?)
Now, sequels and prequels are different from the remake, which we covered in our last excuse to talk about movies.
Not that, mind you, a sequel can’t also be a remake.
The word “sequel” is from the Middle English, from the Anglo-French “sequele” from Latin sequela "to follow."
Someone said, "A sequel is an admission that you've been reduced to imitating yourself."
A film sequel, to qualify as a sequel, chronologically portrays events following those of a previous work.
As opposed to a prequel which portrays events “pre” before, as in “Another Part of the Forest,” a 1948 movie by Lillian Hellman that came after her 1941 drama, “The Little Foxes,” but really describes the "forest" before.
The first sequel in Hollywood history?
Thomas Dixon, whose book "The Clansman" was turned into D.W. Griffith's successful (despite the Klan thing) "Birth of a Nation," didn't profit by it, so he came up with "Fall of a Nation" and started a Hollywood tradition.
Sometimes sequels have unrelated titles such as “The Jewel of the Nile” that followed
“Romancing the Stone" or “The Dark Knight” that followed “Batman Begins,” which makes it confusing.
I like it when they simply add a number, as in "Lethal Weapon 2," or "Spider-Man 3," which makes it easy for someone like me to know it’s a sequel.
Sequels, if there's enough of them, become a series. From what I gather there are no hard and fast rules on how many sequels constitute a series.
Since the World Series is going on, (I am nothing if not topical) I would say seven is a fair amount.
So by that reasoning, The Godfather sequels wouldn’t constitute a series.
Even though “The Godfather: Part II” was the only sequel (and part prequel) to win an Academy Award. Should we call it a presequel?
But I will arbitrarily make "Rocky" a series, because he's family by now and I hear “Rocky 7” is in the works.
And, oddly enough, “The Thin Man” only begat five afterwards, too.
So I may have to rethink my series qualifications to make it six. You have to be flexible in this business.
However, you can't quibble with these series: 007, with 22. Clouseau bungled his way to eight. (Non-Sellers don't count.) “The Whistler,” one of my favorites, whistled in with enough to qualify. Charlie Chan may have set the record with over 50 installments. Sherlock Holmes deduced his way to close to 20 and “Tarzan” was in that neighborhood.
Looking forward to you going out on a limb too—which, after me, may not be that tough of an act to...follow.
The 25 Best Sequels of all Time movies.aol.com Take a look at an interesting article we found.
Best Pictures - Facts & Trivia filmsite.org Take a look at an interesting article we found.
The Golden Age of Hollywood: 1930s - 1940s unc.edu Take a look at an interesting article we found.