Hollywood being the cash-greedy monster that it is, movies nowadays are all about sequel potential. I mean, why stop at one film when you can milk the same plot and characters two, three, or hey... six times?

Hey, you know that first movie that made us buckets of money? Why don’t we regurgitate the whole thing all over?

The truth, of course, is that sequels rarely work. Or rather, from the cash-cow point of view they do – because the paying public will always be happy to fork out more cash to watch its favourite heroes cavorting once again on the big screen. From an artistic, or even an entertainment point of view... my negative outlook is more than justified.

What has brought this on? During the past weeks, there seems to have been an onslaught of highly improbable sequels.

Take the original Die Hard, for instance, released in 1988, starring Bruce Willis when he had hair, and a real gem of a movie.

It even spawned the immortal (if unsuitable for a family newspaper) line, “yippikiyay m**********r”. The film had it all. Action, the love interest, the cheesy but rather hilarious lines... a winner.

Cue a cagillion sequels that grew into a full franchise – Die Hard 2, Die Hard With a Vengeance, Live Free or Die Hard and... wait for it, It’s a Good Day to Die Hard, which opened locally last week.

Now I am most certainly in favour of the good, old-fashioned cheese ’n’ action combo. But not when it gets flogged to death. And that’s what it feels like when you’ve reached the fifth series in a franchise.

Which still isn’t as bad as Resident Evil – definitely one of my favourite zombie movies – which also clocked up enough sequels to earn a promotion to ‘film series’. When the first movie came out back in 2002, presenting a Milla Jovovich so vulnerable yet tough, hot yet innocent... and an Umbrella Corporation (the villain of the series) so shady and mysterious, our intrigue was guaranteed.

It wasn’t just a question of enjoying the action and eye candy. We were all genuinely interested in what was coming next – particularly those who didn’t play the game on which it’s based. By the third sequel, all this changed.

Who cares about viruses and parasites when we can just have fun with the action, right? Plot-lines can go hang.

Don’t get me wrong. The follow-ups to the original were still great fun, but they hardly make for great movies to be remembered. No one is ever going to say “my favourite zombie movie? The third instalment of Resident Evil...”

I know at this point someone will pipe up and mention Lord of the Rings, or Star Trek, or even Star Wars. Why do we consider LoTR volume three a masterpiece by cinematographic standards, while Terminator 3 is pretty crappy?

Ordinarily, James Cameron can do no wrong. He has directed some of my favourite movies, including Aliens – which is an exception to this no-sequels rule. However, he abdicated from Terminator after the second offering and the result is a hodge-podge of styles and plot. Fail.

But back to the original question: what exempts the likes of LoTR, Star Wars and Star Trek from the rule? The reply is that all the films that follow the first one in each respective franchise are not really sequels (or prequels). They were an integral part of the plot from the very beginning. In the case of LoTR, we have a few 100 pages penned by Tolkien as proof that even the three-hour-plus conclusion was actually part of the plan from the very start.

To put it in simpler terms, it’s not like someone woke up one day and said: “Hey, you know that first movie that made us buckets of money? Why don’t we regurgitate the whole thing all over with older and greyer actors? It’s not like anyone will notice.”

And that is what marks the difference between a ho-hum production that you’ll forget as soon as you walk out of the cinema and an epic film that will have everyone dissecting it down to the last second.

rdepares@timesofmalta.com

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.