I always thought as with POTC, Shrek and Iron Man that the next huge franchise would come from somewhere, but instead it seems that many such opportunities are drying up and the industry is burning through the sequels it has available faster then it is generating new ones. So, after Transformers, HP and Batman, will we see the end of this era? Will the top 5 yearly soon look alot less impressive?

I mean the same to some extent for others like Underworld, and Final Destination. As to those three, it may be true that they can do well, but all seem more limited to me than the numbers suggest. And the list is shorter than past years.

In this day and age, Hollywood studios are relying on big splashy known quantities to bring people into theaters. So while the golden era of sequels (1999 to 2013) is coming to a close - there still will quite a few that dominate the studio slates. For better or worse though - reboots look like the way Hollywood is heading.

However, it wouldn't surprise me to see a few more big budget franchise starters green lit in the next few years as we cyclically move back to the 90s.

Its been a glorious run for sequels (BO wise anyway) - though hasn't it. In the last dozen years we've had - Star Wars prequels, Austin Powers, X-Men, Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, Spider-man, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, Toy Story, Iron Man, Bond 007, Transformers, Fast and Furious, The Dark Knight, The Avengers, Shrek, The Hangover, American Pie, Saw, The Mummy etc

No, but it looks to me like nearly everything from now on will have a 4quel or 5quel which takes the shine of series so to speak. But hey, you have the golden goose and then you kill it. It's just business.

We are getting a lot lesser sequels now but the hunt and search continues. I think other than reboots studios are also considering a lot of book/novel based sequels after HP and Twilight.

So while the sequels might have lost their touch it is more obvious that studios are interested in extending this era and we will see a lot of crappier sequels. I mean almost all the movies nowadays end with something for a sequel even the worst ones

The Hunger Games follow-ups Catching Fire and Mockingjay will be mega-sequels when they come out. There will always be new mega-franchises.

Substance vs. one-note gimmicks.
The one-note gimmick sequel may be dead but the story-fueled sequels with something interesting left to say will prevail.

The one-note gimmick sequels otherwise need A One-Note Gimmick That Is Really Interesting...

I don't know if there could ever be a defining golden age of sequels. Theres always too many bad ones, as apposed to good ones, and this decade had the majority of duds, and box office wise for inflation, most sequels of the 80s are in line with the bigger ones of today.

80s was probably the golden age (Stretch of the term) 90s had few because of the 80s franchises mostly being killed and the 00s did a lot of the same.

I think the 00s will be known for a lot of larger larger sequels being dissolved very quickly, almost that the original films almost don't even have the weight they once had as opposed to many sequels of the 70s and 80s.

Since this thread Happy Feet and Ghost Rider are done. Alvin and the Chipmunks is probably done. Sherlock Holmes might continue. Harold and Kumar, Mission Impossible, Underworld, and Journey will return if they so decide. What's new? Dragon Tattoo, apparently Red Tails, and possibly Drive. More continue to die than rise.

Meanwhile Twilight has one more. Transformers will return, although I'm not certain the BO will support a 5th or 6th. There's Insidious 2.

Over the coming months The Hunger Games will begin, and there might be a couple other new ones. But GI Joe, Madagascar, Titans, and MIB could all end. I have no expectations beyond Scary Movie 5. American Pie and Nolan's Batman are confirmed to be ending. Again, they don't look to be replaced.

Sequels won't disappear, and they are doing as well as ever percentagewise compared to their predecessors, but they seem to be thinning out.

It's just a cyclical thing. They only started making consistent quality comic book movie franchises relatively recently - they're getting close to taking Manga seriously with talk of Battle Angel.

Just wait until they start taking video games seriously. We could see near-LOTR quality franchises for Zelda, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, and the list goes on and on.

I think they've only just begun to realize how to make franchises really last, with Harry Potter and others. It's something they will likely only improve upon I think. And you don't need known properties to have big sequels - good quality originals can produce big franchises, and you never know when the next will hit. There will be a small lull, and then the next 'golden age' will hit.

Don't underestimate Hollywood's desire to make loads of money.

Mate, your argument is flawed as hell. I had a thread somewhere showing sequel drops but let's see why.

Happy Feet, 5 years after the first, no distinction from the first, songs popular nearly half a decade ago, no plot all clearly visible beforehand plus did Happy Feet 2 really scream to be made was dancing penguins ever going to be a franchise? No.

Ghost Rider, 5 years after the first, no distinction from the first, badly received movie, bad buzz, unwanted, did you really think people would return? Did you really expect people to be as stupid given the evidence?

Why did Mission Impossible 4, X-Men FC, ROTPOTA all exceed their expectations? They were good.

Sherlock 2 and Panda 2 are exceptions, the first, might have been boosted by Avatar more than we know and the second still remains a mystery.

So, let me tell you now, MIB3, M3, Wrath will all fall. No one asked for M2 and even less care for M3. MIB is so outdated I could smell the rot when they greenlighted it. Wrath, really, that's like telling me you're surprised a sequel to Jack & Jill will fall from its predecessor. No one really felt anything for Clash, Wrath is an afterthought.

GI Joe 2 would suffer a similar fate but the Rock has been supercharging movies with the badassery and charisma he brings along so it could survive this time round.

Anyhow why do you need sequels? There'll always be ones, don't rely on crap movies to be franchises and base everything on them. The 90s survived fine with original hits mind you and they adjust to more than blockbusters today.

Plus, the Vow is making twice that of New Year's Eve, so who gives a fuck when crap sequels and wannabe shit franchises fail?

Alvin and the Chipmunks will most likely continue, I mean it will pass $350 million worldwide... Sherlock Holmes will be back too.

There will be new movies with sequels. Paranormal Activity is as strong as ever and there is no sign for it slowing down.

Grown Ups 2 is actually coming...

What Golden Age?

Sequels have always been a part of the studio system and always will be.

Think about:
40 CHARLIE CHAN movies from 1926-1948
9 MA AND PA KETTLE movies from 1949-1957 (THE EGG AND I spin-off)
16 ANDY HARDY movies from 1937-1958
6 THE THIN MAN movies from 1934-1947
Even KING KONG had an instant sequel in 1933 (THE SON OF KONG)

I ran a search at IMDB and they found

167 English Language Sequels in the 1930s
299 in the 1940s
106 in the 1950s
122 in the 1960s
196 in the 1970s
363 in the 1980s
441 in the 1990s
321 in the 2000s
148 so far in the 2010s

The OP was probably referencing the fact that the recent decade was dominated by sequels at the BO compared to other decades. Still hard to believe there were more sequels in the 90s than the 00s. Seems odd.

I agree with ^^

The OP is talking about BO wise. Just look at the list and it's very clear. I don't think we'll have a run like we had in the 00s with all those sequels making major box office like they did.

This is an interesting thought, but after taking a few minutes to look ahead the next few years, it seems there are a lot of sequels coming, both high profile and medium range. Of movies being released this year that will likely/possibly see another film in the franchise... Bolded titles are likely top 5 of their year...

Underworld
Journey to the Center of the Earth
Anything to do with Tyler Perry
The Hunger Games
Clash of the Titans (we'll see how Wrath does)
The Avengers (as a whole, as well as sequels to Iron Man and Thor, maybe even Captain America)
Snow White and the Huntsman (if this hits big they'll find a way to make sequels)
Madagascar
Prometheus (Alien prequels)
GI Joe (I'm not convinced this is that last one, The Rock has been on fire lately)
Spider-Man
Ice Age
Step Up (domestic is falling, but international is rising, I think this has at least one more left after #4)
Bourne
Resident Evil
Bond
Hobbit (though it's two and done)

Not to mention films continuing franchises in 2013 that don't have films in 2012...

Percy Jackson
Evil Dead (please let this not suck!)
Star Trek
Fast and Furious
Superman
Despicable Me
X-Men/Wolverine
The Smurfs
Riddick

And sequels to hits in 2011 that aren't announced or on the schedule yet...

Bridemaids
Hangover
Pirates of the Caribbean
Transformers
Horrible Bosses
Planet of the Apes
Drive (this would be cool though I don't know if it will happen)
Paranormal Activity
Puss In Boots
Harold and Kumar
The Muppets
Alvin & the Chipmunks
Mission Impossible
Sherlock Holmes
Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Adventures of TinTin

And there's obviously Avatar as well, which is a few years away.

I'd say sequels are alive and well for a while. I will be keeping my eyes looking for the next big one though. I would like to see a big franchise come along not based on previous material.

Difference is, the 90s had far more sequels to lesser films. The video age surged and DTV sequels became famous. I remember even like 3 Universal Soldiers sequels, 3 Blade Runner sequels, etc. during the 90s.

Though for wide releases 2007 which probably has the most dominance of sequels had 16 including reissues. 1990 for instance had 18 including reissues. Could be much higher though as most of the 90s only go up to 100 films. 2003 had 21 sequels in there top 100.

80s definitely should be considered the golden age, Quality is there as is almost the same number as the 50s, 60s, and 70s, combined.

Right I forgot about PA and Muppets.

I would think Dreamworks would go with something else before PIB 2, although the OS numbers were great. I would think Tintin 2 is even less likely.

Sherlock Holmes was a know quantity before release, so it had more downward potential from the start.

You think Manga could be anything near comic book movies?



The thing about comic books, books, and TV series is that they can be more easily translated to theaters because the core story and characters remain. Resident Evil might be able to keep some elements of action and tone to attract its audience, but I think Doom says a lot about the potential of other VG movies.



I think they are running out of properties from CB, books, old TV shows, and toys. How many new huge book series can you expect a decade? 4 maybe if we're fortunate.

As to originals creating franchises, I think that about a decade ago many new films seemed to be giving a glimpse into their world. The Mummy, American Pie, Austin Powers, Rush Hour, Meet the Parents, National Treasure, Pirates of the Caribbean, Shrek, Bourne, and Toy Story all seemed lent to be translated easily into sequels. Now, so many hits seem to be focused on their concept or a specific frame of events. Just over the past two weeks The Vow, Safe House, and This Means War, all would make me wonder where they could try to take it from there. Anyway, the number of 100m original profitable movies is pretty limited especially outside of animation.

We could have had Last Airbender Book 2: Earth next year as a mega sequel if someone didn't fuck up the first one so badly...

I bumb this for Catching Fire.

Since this thread Avengers has obviously show it has potential. Batman ended. Catching Fire stumbed. Skyfall showed Bond endures as well as ever. Hobbit somewhat disappointed; 2 more to go. Twilight ended. SM continues. I doubt Brave gets a sequel. Ted will. Madagascar 4 might always be possible. MIB might be done. Ice Age might continue. Hotel Transylvania gets a sequel. Taken is done I'd guess. 22 Jump street will happen. And so on

I still count more probably ending than beginning.

Catching Fire did not live up to immense expectations, including mine. Is it fair to say that a movie that will most likely gross $350+ million and that will finish with $800+ million overseas....STUMBLED?

Taken is not done. Taken 3 has been confirmed.

This is not ending at all. We'll see Another Wolverine film, G.I. Joe 3 is coming, The Croods started a new franchise that will most likely be very successful, Fast & Furious looks locked down for at least three more films, The Conjuring started a new franchise, Insidious 3 has been confirmed, Olympus Hs Fallen is getting a sequel, Die Hard is good for another go, Wreck-It Ralph will get a sequel, Magic Mike 2 is in the works...

It seems really convenient to have another Taken storyline. I wonder why they would continue Die Hard at this point.

Because it makes money overseas.

Was a sequel to Elf ever considered?