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...
- 28/08/2012
- 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 articles de blog ci-dessus. Ce contenu est publié uniquement pour le divertissement de nos utilisateurs. Les articles de presse, les Tweets et les articles de blog ne représentent pas les opinions d'IMDb et nous ne pouvons pas garantir que les informations qu'ils contiennent sont totalement factuelles. Consultez la source responsable du contenu en question pour signaler tout problème que vous pourriez avoir concernant le contenu ou son exactitude.