Quotes About Sequels

I've always made sequels, even when I was making Super 8 movies if the audience liked it.

We should do another 10 Bad Boys movies. I could come in in one of those electric wheelchairs, like Peter Sellers in Dr Strangelove, just shouting away.

I don't have a specific message for 'The Grace of Kings' and the sequels in mind other than wanting to challenge some of the source material I was working from as well as some of the assumptions of epic fantasy.

When you look at the 'Roseannes' and the 'Will and Graces' - when those reboots or sequels or whatever you want to call them are well-executed and have a fresh angle that's relevant, it's a big, warm comfort hug to the audience.

'Jurassic Park' is like 'Star Wars.' Different directors can give a different taste to each movie.

I am wary of sequels. I understand them from the studio's point of view, but the audience doesn't want more, they want better, and I thought the second 'Ghostbusters' was not very effective, it did not really work, so there's no reason to believe a third would. I'm more interested in new things.

There could be more 'Dhooms' every couple of years. There are chances of 'Dhoom: 4' and 'Dhoom: 5,' if people want it.

A lot of superhero sequel movies, they resemble each other greatly.

Before sequels became the most reliable way to make a buck, Bond set the standard for lavish serial adventures. Before Hollywood found gold in multimillion-dollar adaptations of comic-book characters - in the Superman, Batman and Spider-Man blockbusters - Bond was the movies' first big-budget franchise superhero.

I suppose sequels are inevitable for a writer of a certain age.

I'm an audience member too, man. I hate shitty sequels.

I think a sequel is a waste of money and time. I think movies should illuminate new stories.

I so desperately hate to end these movies that the first thing I do when I'm done is write another one. Then I don't feel sad about having to leave and everybody going away.

If you look at the best-seller list for American fiction, they're all sequels to detective stories or stories about hunting serial killers. That's what's called American fiction these days.

My favorite sequels are basically all Mike Myers films - 'Wayne's World 2,' 'Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me,' 'Shrek 2.' Anything he does, it's best the second time around. He needs to do 'So I Married an Axe Murderer 2.'

You know for years before the notion of sequels, actors were the franchise. John Wayne would rarely do sequels, but he kind of played the same guy with a different name in every movie. I have no problem with using actors as franchises. And that's what is fun to do.

After 'Pitch Perfect,' I only want to be in sequels. No. 2 of whatever.

We've got plans for 'Fable' III, IV, and V. It's a big story arc, and if you play Fable II, you'll recognize things from 'Fable I.'

The film studios learned to our dismay but to their pleasure that if they spent $200 million making a film they could make half a billion on it. So they were not interested anymore in quality films.... They can't afford to be that risky at those prices. Consequently you're getting a lot of remakes, sequels, dopey comedies full of toilet jokes.

Sequels face the risk of being constantly compared to the first film.

When you have films like 'Bourne' that succeed, not only does it beget sequels, but it begets people taking chances.

As long as life exists, something always happens next. There are always consequences—always sequels.

As far as expense, I think if 'Twilight' does well enough, then we should be able to do the big expensive stuff for the sequels. I mean, we have to have werewolves, there's no way around it. They have to be there.

The film industry is run by multinational media conglomerates and they have their perspective on what they need from their product. That's why we live in an era where you see reboots and sequels and remakes and prequels, all these old presents are re-wrapped and offered up as new gifts.