Another Case against Unwanted Sequels and Trilogies

When do you watch a sequel or even the third movie of a trilogy? There are many opinions on that one, that’s for sure.

I came to the following conclusion: you want to watch a sequel when you want to see more.

But this is where a massive problem comes into play that plagues many if not most sequels or thirds. Ironically it’s the first movie itself that basically starts everything else.

When you read screenwriting books you read a lot about story/plot structure and so on. Basically you can divide a movie in three or more parts. You have the first fifteen minutes in which the setting, characters and so on are introduced. Then the second act kicks in and messes up the lives (and the plot). This second act heats up continuously until the third act kicks in until the heroes save the day, get busted or regain their love.

This kind of structure doesn’t allow much room for open questions. Big open questions.

So because of this plot structure, you rarely watch a movie that leaves enough (big) questions unanswered so you have an urge to continue – which goes beyond pure eye-candy or action stuff. In other words, you rarely watch movies that intrigue you to find out more. To want to learn more about the world. To see more of this world presented up to the final minute.

If nothing else, you can say that movies are no TV series in which the continuation of a plot is a part of the storytelling from the get-go. As a result, we get presented nasty, horrible, time-stealing sequels which were never meant to be because the original movie never thought of this possibility.

Leave a reply