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...
- 2012-08-28
- par Alex Leadbeater
- Obsessed with Film
IMDb.com, Inc. n'assume aucune responsabilité quant au contenu ou à l'exactitude des articles de presse, des tweets ou des billets de blogue susmentionnés. Ce contenu est publié uniquement dans le but de divertir nos utilisateurs. Les articles de presse, les tweets et les billets de blogue ne représentent pas les opinions d'IMDb et nous ne pouvons pas garantir que les informations qu'ils contiennent sont entièrement factuelles. Veuillez consulter la source responsable de l’article en question pour signaler toute préoccupation que vous pourriez avoir concernant son contenu ou son exactitude.