Isn’t it usual, when the sequel name is the same as the first but with a number after it, it has a subtitle? Like the Die Hards. There’s Die Hard (it isn’t Die Hard I, either. Just Die Hard) and then Die Hard II: Die Harder. And then Die yet again but this time with a Vengeance.
How about the Rocky Movies? Are they Rocky, Rocky I, Rocky II. . . and so on with no other descriptions in the title?
The Star Wars movies: My husband insists the name of the first movie was always Star Wars: Episode 4. Pshaw! says I. They didn’t know there were gonna make 6 movies when the first one was named.
I’d like to point out that the Aliens movies don’t exactly follow the formula either. They are Alien, Aliens and Alien to the third Power. All right, all right-- Alien[sup]3[/sup] could be pronounced “Alien three” but we all know that isn’t what is written.
Every sequel should use the Indiana Jones/Harry Potter “and the” solution.
Are there any sequels that are actually titled ‘Name of first movie roman numeral number 2’ with no sub-title or other explanations?
The very first movie to use the concention (if you don’t count those old silent 5 minute movies) was Quatermass 2, which was known in the US as Enemy from Space. It had no subtitle in Britain. (Note that the “2” was Indo-Arabic, not Roman)
The next movie with that sort of title, several sources tell me, was The Godfather II (which was the first to use the Roman Numeral). Also no subtitle.
I’m not sure which was the first numbered sequel with a subtitle.
Though it’s one of the movies that don’t exist ( as per another current thread) Speed 2: Cruise Controll was kinda witty. But since it was the only witty thing about the project, it got canned.
Star Wars was not titled “Episode IV” or anything similar when it was first released. We’ve been over that many times before in this forum (I just read it again a few days ago). “Episode IV: A New Hope” was added to the title when the movie was re-released a few years later.
You mean like the first one, Raiders of the Lost Ark?