Sure, but he said “weren’t a thing,” not, “were less common.”
Like, yes, there have definitely been a rise in needless sequels, but it’s not like 1995 (year chosen at random and googled) didn’t have a sequel to “Ace Ventura: Pet Detective” as one of the top 5 movies of that year.
And if ever there was a franchise in which sequels were needless, lol.
Also, (sorry for the second post), but did you actually read your sources? Cause I just did and they actually say that the number of needless sequels has either stayed the same or gone down since the 80s.
They are performing far better than they used to, but there are actually less of them now than ever.
No, because they’ve been doing them since before I was born. Are you over 60 years old? because if not, they’ve been doing them since before you were born too.
I’ll agree that there are more sequels now because studios are even more adverse to new ideas than before, but let’s not pretend shit like the slasher franchises of the 80s aren’t examples of needless sequels becoming the trend. Studios have been on the search for money since Hollywood became a cultural force. Hell, look up some of the beach party franchises of the 60s, do you think any of those sequels were necessary?
Take a look at the numbers. There are way more today than ever before, full stop.
You want to pull out the standouts, the few that did occur, is just a goalpost move trying to make it seem like it was as common as today, rather than the exception - which the numbers prove.
Remember when needles sequels weren’t a thing? Pepperidge Farms remembers
When was this fantastical time? Cause I’m unconvinced it exists, lol.
Not like today, by a long shot.
I’d say today’s trend began in the 90’s and has exploded since.
Edit: Some sources
The proportion of top-grossing films that are sequels roughly doubled in the 2000s / 2010s compared with the 1990s
Sequels and Remakes in Hollywood, 1991 to 2010
Letter: Sequels and franchises, still the film business holy grail
Sure, but he said “weren’t a thing,” not, “were less common.”
Like, yes, there have definitely been a rise in needless sequels, but it’s not like 1995 (year chosen at random and googled) didn’t have a sequel to “Ace Ventura: Pet Detective” as one of the top 5 movies of that year.
And if ever there was a franchise in which sequels were needless, lol.
Back to the future, ghost busters, Star Wars, Jaws, we’re all popular 80s sequel/series.
Terminator 2 came out in 91 but might as well have been an 80s sequel.
Tons of 1980s horror and comedy movies as well.
Don’t go putting words in my mouth, I said “Not like today”.
Don’t go being a sophist.
Also, (sorry for the second post), but did you actually read your sources? Cause I just did and they actually say that the number of needless sequels has either stayed the same or gone down since the 80s.
They are performing far better than they used to, but there are actually less of them now than ever.
I didn’t put words in your mouth. I was quoting the post I originally replied to.
I said that he said needless sequels “weren’t a thing.”
(He actually said “needles” sequels, to actually be pedantic, but I think that was probably a typo)
So people are seeing sequels more than they used to.
No, because they’ve been doing them since before I was born. Are you over 60 years old? because if not, they’ve been doing them since before you were born too.
Not like today, by a long shot.
I’d say today’s trend began in the 90’s and has exploded since.
Edit: Some sources
The proportion of top-grossing films that are sequels roughly doubled in the 2000s / 2010s compared with the 1990s
Sequels and Remakes in Hollywood, 1991 to 2010
Letter: Sequels and franchises, still the film business holy grail
I’ll agree that there are more sequels now because studios are even more adverse to new ideas than before, but let’s not pretend shit like the slasher franchises of the 80s aren’t examples of needless sequels becoming the trend. Studios have been on the search for money since Hollywood became a cultural force. Hell, look up some of the beach party franchises of the 60s, do you think any of those sequels were necessary?
And yet, the numbers still show rhere are far more today.
The movies you bring up were the few sequel-based things out there, and were the exception.
So what if they were the exception? That shit has been going on since at least the 1960.
There are a total of 25 James Bonds, there was basically a new one every year in 1960.
There was never such a time.
Not like today, by a long shot.
I’d say today’s trend began in the 90’s and has exploded since.
Edit: Some sources
The proportion of top-grossing films that are sequels roughly doubled in the 2000s / 2010s compared with the 1990s
Sequels and Remakes in Hollywood, 1991 to 2010
Letter: Sequels and franchises, still the film business holy grail
Between 1932 and 1948 Johnny Weissmuller made 12 Tarzan movies.
Since 1962 there have been 24 James Bond movies.
Since 1954 there have been 37 Godzilla sequels.
Since 1979 there have been 45 Amittyville Horror Sequels.
How many Police Academy Movies were made in the 80s?
How many Friday the 13th?
Star Treks?
Sequels have always been a thing.
So?
Take a look at the numbers. There are way more today than ever before, full stop.
You want to pull out the standouts, the few that did occur, is just a goalpost move trying to make it seem like it was as common as today, rather than the exception - which the numbers prove.
You are moving the goal posts. You started with remember when mindless sequels weren’t a thing to there are more now …
Sequels have always been a thing and always will be.
Did you read your own sources? They absolutely contradict the point you just made.
The number of sequels is the same as it’s ever been. Maybe even less.
It’s just that sequels perform better at the box office and pull in more viewers.
But there definitely aren’t more sequels according to the sources that you shared.