Rant - The Summer of Threequels

For anybody paying attention, I think you’ll agree that there has been an obnoxious amount of sequels hitting theatres this spring and summer – mostly part 3s, or as I like to call them: Threequels (no, I did not coin the term).

We have already seen releases of threequels to Ocean’s 11, Spider-Man, Shrek, and Pirates of the Caribbean. Rest assured there is still more on the way. What’s the deal with all these threequels you ask? Well, most studios consider them a guaranteed payday since these films continue established franchises that have already performed very well at the box-office. Beyond that, I have to speculate. One thing I do know for sure though is that threequels have a remarkable history of sucking ass and de-railing their previously successful movie franchises. Take a look at some examples:

Jaws 3…SUCKED! Shrek 3…BLEW! X-Men 3…AWFUL! Spider-Man 3…LAME! Terminator 3…LICKED IT! Batman 3…CRAP! Beverly Hills Cop 3…TERRIBLE! Rambo 3…DEAR GOD! Godfather 3…SPARE US! Superman 3…FUGLY! Matrix 2 & 3 (written and filmed at same time)…HORRIBLE! Alien 3… DISASTER!



All of these movie franchises, and so many more, have had undeniably good first and second movies, followed by a shitty threequel. I am sure you can come up with your own examples as well. Go ahead… So, are we seeing a pattern here? I sure am. But why must the threequel so often be doomed to failure?

I think a lot of these movie franchises suffered because, as their popularity grew, too many people within the industry (writers, producers, studio execs, etc.) began to try to affiliate themselves with these money making movies. As a result, too many people try to have a say in the movie and end up watering down what made the first and second movies great. Just look at Spider-Man 3. Director Sam Raimi has been quoted as saying he hates Venom and did not want to use him in the movie. However, studio executives forced him to cater to fanboy demands and we were treated to a bloated film with too many story lines and characters.

Additionally, expanding budgets of each consecutive movie makes wasting time and money a lot easier and encourages crap writing, performances, etc. just so a quick paycheck can be collected. The Matrix sequels are a great example. Part 2 and 3 (filmed together) had one of the largest budgets of their time – they built a two mile strip of fake interstate at a cost of $2.5 million for god’s sake! What did all that money and concrete produce? Two crappy movies that feel like a rushed departure from the perfection created in the first.

Finally, I think that these threequel franchises have a tendency to suck the life out of the creative talent behind them. Writers, directors and even actors can spend up to a year or more working on each film. Picture doing that for three movies in a row and that can easily be five years of your life, depending on the production pace. Think about it: writer/producer/director George Lucas spent around 10 years producing the three Star Wars prequels! Who wants to spend five years or more of their life directing the same movie over and over again, only this time making it bigger, louder and faster? Usually what happens is that creative talent that made the first two movies great bails out on the third, handing the reins over to a people who have no clue and no love for the original material. This is precisely the path to suckville that X-Men, Terminator and Batman took.

We are even starting to see more planned threequels now. I think Back to the Future may have started this trend, and it has gained momentum with sequels to The Matrix, Pirates of the Caribbean and Lord of the Rings all filming their second and third movies at the same time. This saves the studios money through economies of scale, increases turn-around time and reduces burn-out of the creative talent. I imagine with the success of The Transformers that a similar approach will be taken with its sequels in hopes of releases in 2009 and 2010; and remember, we already know that Shrek 4 & 5 are currently in pre-production.

As we can see, just depending on sequels as a sure bet does not have a good performance track record. Its time for Hollywood to come to the realization that fresh talent and creative writing and ideas need to be injected into the studio system more often. Otherwise, each year we are going to be treated to more and more sequels of consistently degrading quality - like the planned sure fire hits of The Mummy 3 and Fantastic Four 3.

Anyway, I need to go mark my calendar for the threequel releases of Rush Hour, The Bourne Identity and Resident Evil; all coming out later this year!!

What other crappy threequels can you think of? Go ahead, share them in our comments section.

UPDATE!! (7/16/07) - Speaking of sequels, Variety has a nice article that talks about a variety (heh heh) of films coming out through 2010. Some sequels, but not tons of them! There is hope! Check out the article HERE