I just thought your post was a sequel.
No, but 1958’s *War of the Colossal Beast *certainly does. 50 Foot Woman is more like *Orca *popping up after the success of Jaws.
And this is why I come to the SD.
Three of us who are not movie people and rarely if ever watch older movies could not come up with a single example. In about a hour the SD “voice” has answered the question with examples to spare.
No money was running on this but Im sure Im going to be the one to return with the most examples tonight.
Thanks to all of you!
There does feel like a trend in success of sequels. This is the only graphic I could find but it could be that the years were cherry picked.
Let’s see…
You mean besides Planet of the Apes or Godfather?
Hmmm…
Planet of the Godfather Apes
.
It’s certainly inaccurate. Harry Potter and Twilight should be adaptations, not sequels. So was For Your Eyes Only (sort of). Not much of the original story in the film, but still.
Also, Oceans 11 was a remake. They could have had a separate colour code for remakes, but if not, count it as an adaptation.
There were 16 Andy Hardy movies. Many of the early ones were quite popular, helping make Mickey Rooney a top box draw.
Sequel in name only (like “Halloween 3: Season of the Witch”). Dixon was trying to cash in on the name recognition of “Birth.” It’s a futuristic novel that deals with a European invasion of the US.
Rudolph Valentino did The Sheik in 1921 and Son of the Sheik in 1926.
John Bunny was doing short film sequels in 1909. His first two films were Cohen at Coney Island and Cohen’s Dream
Max Linder was doing movies portraying the same character starting in 1907.
The Robe, then Demetrius and the Gladiator
There’s the joke about the Hollywood exec saying, “That last movie we made was so popular, we’re going to do a Life of Christ 2”
Don’t forget anything Disney - Son of Flubber, anything Herbie, etc.
Cool. When are they doing the sequel to Titanic? That movie was pretty good and made a boatload [heh] of money.
Leo Gorcey and Huntz Hall, among others, played the Dead End Kids for DECADES, well into Gorcey’s adulthood; if memory serves, he finally quit when his father, who played a minor role in many of these films, died. Movie series are NOTHING new.
I see us talking about two different things. Thin Man, Blondie, Chan, those series were more like television sitcom episodes. Same characters, same back ground, but different stories to be told each time so that it doesn’t much matter which order you see them. Oh, sure, if it’s a long running series it can be disconcerting to see Alexander in one movie and someone named Baby in the other and figure out it’s the same character.
Serials like Hazards of Helen or Flash Gordon usually have a cliff hanger at the end of each episode which is resolved in the next episode. The individual episodes have their own story which is mostly told within that reel, but there is a hero and his sidekicks being persued by the evil mastermind on their way to The Big Reward.
An actual sequal would be where all the main surviving characters would be shown with their story lines lifted into the next movie. More of a serial, but not like a series. So I’d condsider Godfather II a sequal, but not American Graffitti II or Airplane II.
“I’m gonna give him a banana he can’t refuse.”
So what you’re saying is that a “series” film always ends with the situation resetting to Status Quo, and you can watch the films pretty much in any order? The Blondie films and the Andy Hardy movies were much like this, as well as the Bowery Boys, Dead End Kids, and a lot of the detective movies.
On the other hand, so are the James Bond movies. Godfather II, on the other hand, is a prequel to its predecessor, while 3 is a continuation of Michael Corleone’s story. So… GF 2 and 3 are sequels, whereas the Andy Hardy films aren’t?
Yeah but the Tarzan movies, like the books, had individual story arcs. That kind of sequel was super common at the time, since given that all the actors were under contract doing yet another movie in the series was simple and even economical, given that the sets existed already.
The first two SW sequels were all part of the same arc. Certainly the first one ended at a good place, in case no others got made, but Empire flowed naturally from the events in a New Hope.
The history plays about the War of the Roses are a good example of the type of sequel I was looking for. Kind of cheating since they aren’t that made up, but they tell of a single conflict with characters often shared across plays.
Merry Wives of Windsor, on the other hand, is an example of the other type of sequel, using a familiar character but not having anything much to do with the main story arc.
Since I was trying to say the same thing, you got it. TV is now showing the difference also. ST-TOS can be viewed in any order, the only exception being that Trouble with Tribbles depends slightly on Errand of Mercy. On the other hand, when I was watching TNG in order (I had seen episodes randomly before) there was a lot of stuff I got that I didn’t get before. Old TV had individual episodes, modern TV has story arcs.
Let us not forget *Bonzo Goes to College*, the stirring and epic sequel to Bedtime for Bonzo.
Such as? Some 19th century authors wrote sequels (perhaps most famously, Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass and Twain’s Huckleberry Finn), but I can’t think of any Dickens sequels.
Going back further, The Pilgrim’s Progress had a sequel (or “second part”). And one could argue that The Odyssey counts as a sequel to The Iliad.