sequel or prequel or none

Horrorphile

follow this blog

1043 followers

3405 daily readers

rank of 1

E-mail Subscription

Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:

SEQUEL or PREQUEL ... is that the question?

July 24th 2007 01:49

I come back to this dilemma time and time again. I’m not a stuck record, I’m a stuck pig! Squeeeeeaall!!!! There is no dilemma, there should not be sequels. Well, I guess I’ll admit that there are a handful of exceptions where there has been enough savvy and sophistication employed into a movie sequel, and the audience doesn’t feel like the original has been done a disservice.

There are some which have taken the sequel to utterly absurd lengths. We know the culprits. One dons an ice hockey mask, the other wears awkward gloves. And there have been sequels which, arguably, are at least as interesting as the original, and in some camps they are even preferred over the original. Two examples of the latter are a bunch of eight-feet-tall, dual-jawed, acid-for-blood ETs, and the other is a sociopath doctor hiding out in Italy who indulges his taste for human liver with a nice glass of Chianti.

So, is there a time and place for sequels? Why do some truly great films get ruined by the unnecessary extension of narrative threads thought to be nicely wrapped up at original movie’s end, or left hanging deliciously to savour for decades to come?

Hellbound: Hellraiser II female-cenobite

Hellbound cenobite

Some movies have a sensational first film at time of release, and then follow it up with an even darker and more perverse sequel, which over time becomes regarded as superior in tone and execution to the original. Several further (terrible) sequels are made, each one steadily worse than the previous, until they are no longer released theatrically and are produced back-to-back and thrown into the DVD market with little or no fanfare whatsoever, even if the original creator still commands respect. I’m talking about Clive Barker’s Hellraiser series.

So what about John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982)? It's a remake of a 1951 black and white B-movie called The Thing From Another World directed by Howard Hawks. In some circles (usually the older, more conservative set) the original is regarded very highly, for its characterizations. But it’s not very convincing in creating menace or suspense. Carpenter’s remake actually follows the original short story, Who Goes There? By John Campbell, more closely, and although heavily criticized upon its release for being simply a disgusting gore-fest with shallow characterization, it is now regarded as one of the finest horror films of the 80s - even of the modern horror age.

True Believin’ fans always feared a sequel to the remake would be made. And it is finally happening. Universal Studios who own the rights to the movie (yes, although Carpenter has his name attached in the title it is purely artistic license) have decided to push through with a sequel. Initial word on the icy streets was that it was to be a prequel, dealing with the plight of the Norwegian team. Essentially the same story would be told, so not really that interesting, although the initial stages could be cool with the team discovering the UFO in the ice and then the frozen beast.

MacReady

The question I’ve always wondered was what on Earth was inside the irreparably damaged spacecraft? We assume the Americans descended inside, because we see MacReady and Norris approach the open hatchway on the top of the exposed craft. Surely the Norwegians would’ve done the same. And was the frozen alien the only intergalactic traveller? Perhaps it was a stowaway onboard another alien’s craft? The inside of the craft would’ve contained a wealth of extra-terrestrial artifacts.

Childs

But I digress … So what will the sequel to The Thing deal with? Does either MacReady or Childs survive long enough to be rescued? Is either of them actually infected? We have to assume one of them is otherwise what’s the bloody point, right? So the sequel deals with the thing infecting the main land … Either Stewart Island, off the southern end of New Zealand, or Tasmania.

Chopper

I know! The sequel is a raucous, no-holds-barred, ultra-violent, pitch black comedy called Chopper vs. The Thing. Neville Bartos would never have a chance! But Chopper Read could teach that slimey xenomorph a few things about stand-over tactics!

I’m getting carried away here … So, the question at hand: Is there a horror movie that honestly and intelligently demands a sequel, or a prequel … which has yet to be made?

132

Vote

subscribe to this blog

follow this blog on Orble

start your own blog

[ Link ]

Posted By: Bryn - Category: vitriol

Related Posts:

Relate This Post

[ Previous - What turns a GOOD dream BAD? ]

[ Next - Horror QUIZ #14: Whose Eye Am I? - II ]

Comments

17 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]

Comment by Damo

July 24th 2007 03:17

Chopper verses The Thing
I find the finance and start pre production right away.
We could even have Chopper play himself as an egotistical excrim seeking attention for another lame book about his Macievallian attitudes.
But I digress.

Few sequals have been an improvement but only a quick way of cashing in on the original success.
With few exceptions. Usually because the writers already had the sequal in mind or the sequal is part of the continuing story.

Alien 1 2 terrific.
Alien 3 yawn.
Alien Resurection: You have to be kidding. gore with out fun, what is the point.
AVP: It was a pissing contest.

It is just like DR Who and Daleks.
In the end they become just an annoyance. "EXTERMINATE,EXTERMINATE."
But we always know the eccentric Dr will win so what is the point?

Comment by Bryn

July 24th 2007 03:45

Horrorphile

Beautifully stated Damo ... I'll begin work on a treatment for Chopper vs. The Thing immediately!

Comment by Terry

July 24th 2007 04:37

MysTerry's Mansion
Theatre of the mind

For me Army of Darkness rocked but Evil Dead just made me want to demand my money back.

I always shy away from prequels, sequels or any movie who's title is a road sign.

Hurdy Gur

Terry

Comment by KylieW

July 24th 2007 05:25

Celebrity Obsession

HAHAHAHA, Chopper vs The Thing. Brilliant. I love it.

I can see why film studios do sequels. Even as a viewer, it's hard to argue against it, when you loved the original. Of course you want to see your favourite characters back. But unfortunately there are so few sequels that are worth the effort.

I remember watching an Exorcist double header of The Exorcist 1 & 2. The Exorcist is a great movie. Exorcist 2 is........well.......not good at all. I remember watching it and thinking WTF is this movie? How could they have gone from the first movie to this piece of crap sequel????

If they can pull off a good prequel of The Thing, it'll be great. But I don't think I'll hold my breath.

Comment by MelissaA

July 24th 2007 05:43

Fun Facts

In a word - no!

Comment by Bryn

July 24th 2007 06:06

Horrorphile

Terry, um ... errr, The Evil Dead was the original, then there was Evil Dead II: Dead By Dawn, then Army of Darkness ... personally I love the original. It chunders serious horror chutzpah! All my mates loved the sequel, but it was too slapstick for my tastes, as for Army, I'd lost interest by then and was onto deeper, darker fare. But each to their own ... lol So, am I to gather you didn't like Wolf Creek ...??

Kylie, hard to believe the mostly excellent John Boorman was behind Exorcist II: The Heretic. Apparently he "lost control" of the movie and executives re-cut the film, or something like that ... His original vision would have been interesting, but it no longer exists ....

Melissa, in two more words ...'fraid so.

Comment by Terry

July 24th 2007 06:18

MysTerry's Mansion
Theatre of the mind

I know Evil Dead was the original but I didn't care for it, nor for Wolf Creek, Rest Stop, Wrong Turn, Dead End, etc...ugh they were all the same to me.

Hurdy Gur

Terry

Comment by Bryn

July 24th 2007 07:23

Horrorphile

HAHAHA ... that made me laugh ... Guess you won't appreciate my current screenplay, "Black Ice" ... lol

Comment by Chic Critique

July 24th 2007 13:37

The Thing is a disgusting gore fest, but it's also an incredibly good movie.

They keep re-hashing old ideas (I mean, Harrison Ford is doing ANOTHER Indiana Jones?) because they're running out of good ones. Also, I think they're less inclined to invest in ideas that aren't automatically bankable like Sequels and Prequels tend to be. Even though they may not be critically successful, you can be guaranteed of a certain return on investment due to the original films success. New ideas mean risk!

Sad but true. I couldn't agree with you more, your argument is sound. Great post.

And by the way, I liked Alien Resurrection! Probably just a cos of Joss Whedon's script though. Die hard Buffy fan, me.

Comment by Nickoftime's Sanity Corner

July 24th 2007 14:48

Bryn,

loved both the original b&w version and the John Carpenter remake of The Thing, although the remake for me was somehow much more nerve-wracking and gave me a few good jumps in my seat...

It's become one of my classics too...

But Chopper vs The Thing!?

Uh, no...

Great review though!

Take care,

Nick

Comment by Bryn

July 25th 2007 00:07

Horrorphile

Chic, thanks! I too enjoyed Alien Resurrection, although the French sense of humour was a little oddball, and clashed I felt. Great production design and special effects though!

Nick, yeah, my tongue was lodged in cheek, I'm sure you could tell ....

Comment by Nina

July 25th 2007 01:13

Chopper vs The Thing would be absolutely brilliant...

Sequels seldom live up to the original. Occasionally, if the story was intended to have more than one part, or does have a lot of loose ends and direction left, then they can work.

Prequels tend to be the same, although a really good origin story can work well.

Comment by Bryn

July 25th 2007 22:31

Horrorphile

Hi Nina,
prequels can be interesting you're right, although Hannibal Rising was disappointing ... and although Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning had a couple of moments and some decent gore, it too was disappointing ...

Comment by Cibbuano

July 26th 2007 23:19

Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak

the problem I find with prequels is that they destroy the magic of the original. I was going to suggest a prequel to Carpenter's They Live... it'd almost write itself.

But then I thought, what made the original so good is that the scenario was unexplained, which meant the audience filled in the blanks...

Comment by Bryn

July 27th 2007 01:52

Horrorphile

Fair call Cibby ...

Comment by Spoon

August 10th 2007 09:36

What you really need to do is watch all of the evil dead movies in a row (and not make the common mistake most people make in believing that ash has returned to the cabin at the beginning of Dead by Dawn - he has never left.. the opening sequence of DbD is a simplified retelling of Evil Dead.), because when you watch them all in a row you can see Ash slowly lose his mind completely and eventually become the legend we all love.... It adds an entirely new dimension to the trilogy... almost (even though we know this isnt the case) as if it was originally meant to be this way...

Comment by Bryn

August 11th 2007 00:03

Horrorphile

Spoon, welcome, I don't think I've seen you here in the Darkness before ...
Yes, I always knew the opening sequence to Dead By Dawn was a re-telling ... I just didn't really dig the increasing level of slapstick humour that made its way into the series ...

[ Previous - What turns a GOOD dream BAD? ]

[ Next - Horror QUIZ #14: Whose Eye Am I? - II ]