A common complaint made about the modern film industry is Hollywood’s lack on imagination and current reliance on sequels. It’s fair to say that they are now more prominent as tentpole releases and it’s certainly a recent development to have a film that spends more time setting up its later instalments over being interesting in it’s own right (‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ please stand up), but sequels in general are nothing new. The first notable one was ‘Death of a Nation’ in 1916, a follow up to ‘Birth of a Nation’, a film as groundbreaking in narrative terms as it is excruciatingly racist.
People should be thankful for the way sequels are regarded nowadays – production values are matching the original with budgets suitable for the size of the ideas – compared to the truly quick, low budget cash-ins of yesteryear. There are exceptions to the rule – some can be...
People should be thankful for the way sequels are regarded nowadays – production values are matching the original with budgets suitable for the size of the ideas – compared to the truly quick, low budget cash-ins of yesteryear. There are exceptions to the rule – some can be...
- 28.8.2012
- von Alex Leadbeater
- Obsessed with Film
IMDb.com, Inc. übernimmt keine Verantwortung für den Inhalt oder die Richtigkeit der oben genannten Nachrichtenartikel, Tweets oder Blog-Beiträge. Dieser Inhalt wird nur zur Unterhaltung unserer Nutzer und Nutzerinnen veröffentlicht. Die Nachrichtenartikel, Tweets und Blog-Beiträge geben weder die Meinung von IMDb wieder, noch können wir garantieren, dass die darin enthaltene Berichterstattung vollständig sachlich ist. Bitte wende dich an die für den betreffenden Artikel verantwortliche Quelle, um deine Bedenken hinsichtlich des Inhalts oder der Richtigkeit zu melden.