Tags
This is a question that is banded about quite a lot over the failing demands of a horror sequel and the endless glut of films that can follow a successful horror movie. In Scream 2, ( one of the better horror sequels out there) a film class debates this very amusingly and perceptively. But what do you think. Do producers go overboard by creating endless films in an undead franchise? Or are there sequels to horror greats that are still effective?
vinnieh 
Well, Evil Dead II was better than Evil Dead, but it also wasn’t a trypical sequel. I dunno Vinnie that’s a tough question. I think in a way, horror is all about coming out with 100 sequels now. In a way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You raise a good point there Mike. There are some sequels that are really good. But a lot of the time, Hollywood sees one as a cash cow and milks it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah for sure. It has to have some integrity to it, I think. Or a good hook that is worth keeping the series going. Hard to think of good horror examples. But sometimes the first movie isn’t necessarily the best one. I think I prefered some of the other Friday the 13th movies ahead of the first one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the Scream movies have a good hook in the main character of Sidney. It is her story after all and her evolving into a strong woman is very well thought out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah I felt Scream revitalized the genre in the 90’s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was a late watcher of the films because upon their release I was still a little kid. But having expanded my horror knowledge, they sure did spin the genre on its head and had fun with it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I saw Scream 2 in theaters! Hahah. Now Scary Movie, they can go ahead and stop making those 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I never liked The Scary Movie series, they are pretty bad.
LikeLike
It will be an endless argument between the two sides, Evil Dead 2 is a more complete film because the budget was bigger which can work well in the business but Insidious Chapter 2 felt like a forced sequel to make a franchise. Certain films will draw audiences like Paranormal Activity and made for next to nothing so you can let a studio make these films because it gives them the money to take chances on other films.
The Purge is a good example of sequels working because they are telling a much bigger story and expanding on it each time. you have Nightmare on Elm Street that has a random mini trilogy in the middle with 3,4 and 5 which again builds of the Freddy character.
Horror will always be the easiest sequel because profit out weights originality. this year we will get a sequel to The COnjuring which works because they are interesting, Lights Out which will get stupid and sadly another Ouija film.
a lot depends on how the directer can change the last film, Aliens is so different to Alien, CHilds Play is so different to Bride of Chcuky
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for that detailed comment. I think things like Alien and Aliens work is that as you said, they are totally different kinds of films. Yet both retain the scare factor a lot. Though you hit the nail on the head when you said horror will make a profit because it outweighs originality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sorry got carried away lol i find myself talking too long on horror subjects recently
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh never apologise. I like to see when someone is passionate about it and has something interesting to stay. At least the conversation doesn’t become stale.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love horror movies! I hate sequels. but sometimes sequels are way better the original. other times it just kills it for me.
The SAW series was epic! I loved it. James wan and Leigh Whannell are an awesome team. (Writing/directing)
An example of a sequel being better than the first? Conjuring 2, Wolf Creek 2.
If it’s made into a series? Good luck!😞😠
Halloween just dragged on because one couldn’t kill Myers, he just kept coming back. The death toll rising. And it was boring. but I liked Halloween H2O and Resurrection out of all them. Friday the 13th seem deal. Nightmare on Elm street was my favorite series aside from SAW.
I mean there is only so much a writer can do to kill a villain bring him back and hope fans don’t get bored. That’s the operative word, bored.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I too am a horror hound. It is refreshing when a sequel is actually good, but the vast majority can’t recapture the feeling of the first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes it is. I love the adrenaline it gives me. However trying to go to sleep after that is the problem 😂😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, make sure to lock the doors and windows.
LikeLike
Oh I have a horrible thing about movies with villains being in the house already😲 eek!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes that can be a creepy feeling. Just remind yourself it is just a movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lol just a movie! With my over reactive mind?!😂😂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly, best way to think about it.
LikeLike
Same deal, damn auto correct
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have no idea! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well there is a definite debate about it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great thought-provoking question Vinnie! While I’m no film expert, I think you have to take them on a case by case basis. I loved Scream, but thought Scream 2 was even better. The scene in Stab (the movie within the movie) where Jada Pickett Smith gets killed was beyond brilliant! I also have a weaknesss for The Final Destination franchise and my favorite of those movies was the second one. And then there’s Bride of Chucky, which is a guilty pleasure of mine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s what I attempt to do Kim, but it can be difficult. Yes Scream 2 for me is one of the better sequels there is out there. I just thought it was a good question to ask.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When a Horror Movie is released it’s a given they’ll be part 1, 2, 3 and 4 then prequels and ‘so and so returns!!!’ And yes turning a Movie into a money grabbing franchise spoils the genre.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t mind a few sequels if they are good. But when it gets to number 8 or something like that, it all gets generic and excessive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great question. As I thought on this I was immediately transported back to the 1980s. That is when horror movie sequels went to extreme levels. But for many of the mentality was significantly different. For mini the endless sequels were enjoyable not because they were good movies but because they were ridiculously bad. That was their draw. Definitely different today though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can get what you mean Keith. When something is spectacularly bad, it can have a novelty value. It can work as a guilty pleasure sort of thing. But sometimes, enough is enough.
LikeLike
That’s why it eventually ran it’s course. But I remember in the school everyone talking about with the new Halloween or Elm Street was coming out. There was a fun quality to them mainly because they were almost looked at as reluctant comedies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have only ever seen the first Halloween, so I can’t really judge the many follow ups. The same goes for Elm Street. Perhaps I should check out the endless run of sequels.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t know if you should. Many of them are really bad. And unless you have the corny 80s sensibility I spoke of they probably won’t leave a very good impression. LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha. Any corny 80’s slashers you can recommend?
LikeLike
I’m happy as long as they offer something different. For me Final Destination 2 was the worst for that reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, if they can offer up something different and not another run of the first film, I don’t mind.
LikeLike
Shame so many don’t haha
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just can’t see the logic in rehashing the same film again. It all gets pretty pointless.
LikeLike
Sequels question goes for all genres I think but when it comes to horror, it is kind of OK. I can’t explain why but for some reason it’s even somewhat cool when there’s Saw 100 coming out at some point. For some reason it’s still entertaining to watch those, usually crappy, sequels. (To me Scream is still better than the second installment but I’ve watched them all and for sure will watch more if they make them. Same goes for Final Destinations.) With other genres it’s easier to dismiss sequels especially if the part one was especially good, you don’t want to go spoiling that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like how you did bring in about other genres, it most definitely does apply. As long as I’m entertained, I don’t usually mind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it depends on the film and how its sequel tries to keep it fresh and retain what made the first film so good. Unfortunately, many of those movies don’t do that and just do the same shit over and over and over and over and over again. Sometimes, it’s funny but other times, it’s just sad.
LikeLiked by 1 person
For me, it all depends on the creativity. Nothing worse than simply recycling the first movie and bringing nothing new to the table.
LikeLike
Good Topic.
While I do believe horror sequel’s are made majority of the time to purely milk the cash cow, I don’t think I’d have it any other way. This may sound like an odd statement, but this type of practise has given us some great franchises and sequels.
Look at Friday The 13th (1980). Absolutely bashed upon it’s initial release! You’d think paramount then would have buried it – forever falling into obscurity, but no, the box office said otherwise and prompted them to make a sequel, ignoring the haters and critics. What we got was a legendary franchise, with each instalment better then the last…. well up too six anyway.
Today there influences is felt in almost every horror film STILL coming out.
This wouldn’t have happened if paramount didn’t decide too milk the cash cow .
Anyway, I hope what I just wrote makes sense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It makes perfect sense. I do like to see when a franchise gets better as it continues. It is what all good franchises should do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well this is probably for any sequels, not just horror. Of course if the 1st one is a blockbuster the company wants to get more money out of it. But if a sequel tries something new while stying within the same world. Good. But if just rehashing the same. Bad.
I actually admired Rob Zombie for his take on Halloween, it was different and a change from the old movies which I’m a huge fan of but he did his thing and kudos for doing it.
Same goes for Nightmare, a lot of awful sequels to be honest but then no 3 is my favourite so all is not bad w sequels.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am all for trying something different. Who really wants to watch just another version of the first movie? If they keep it rotted in the same sort of universe but add other parts, I’m happy.
LikeLike
Absolutely.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I must check out some horror sequels to see what I think.
LikeLike
Not at all, in fact cheesy horror sequels feel like part of the genre. Some are so bad that they’re good and some are actually good!
But having said that, I love my standalone horrors too. I love the mystery in not knowing what happens next.
I definitely don’t thing they are detrimental to the genre though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like your comment there. So bad they are good, I don’t mind something like that on occasion. Ant sometimes cheese is the best way to go.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is it good for the genre to come out with constant sequels? No, not really. But I’m not going to pretend like I don’t enjoy them. I love all the classic slasher sequels, excepting the really bad ones, like say, Freddy’s Dead, Jason Goes to Hell, or Halloween Resurrection. They’re just a lot of fun, especially the Nightmare on Elm Street ones. I’d say that in many respects Dream Warriors and New Nightmare are better than the original NOES.
I do feel like modern endless sequels aren’t as fun though. There used to be this sense of escalation, like things just kept on getting more and more ridiculous, then maybe we’d bring it back to grittiness, then escalate into ridiculousness again. Like how Jason went to space or Freddy went into the real world. But now it’s just more and more of the same. Like, how many times can we watch someone filming everything, ghosts, blah, blah, Paranormal Activity 37? In other words, sequels destroy artistry, but they can be a lot of fun.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There are legitimately great horror sequels though, like Evil Dead 2, Army of Darkness, Aliens, and, for a modern example, The Conjuring 2.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love Aliens so much, a cool sequel. Scream 2 is also a very good second part.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I might like Scream 2 more than the first one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ive heard many a person say that. It is an extremely great follow up to a successful film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can see your logic there. I must confess to only seeing the first Elm Street, perhaps I should rectify that. I think that when a series goes on for too long, it gets very boring and predictable. But if there are a few films, it can be great.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sequels rarely do justice, unless they are a strong film that would be fine not knowing the previous film existed. But if they re-tread stories, or undo all the hard work of the first one, or even replace actors to play characters, it’s all over. Mayb as well not bother.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am with you on that school of thought, if they can stand up well as a film that can be enjoyed without knowledge of the first, it has succeeded.
LikeLike
Late to this one of course, but a simple answer. Yes.
Cheers, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Simple and effective answer Pete.
LikeLike