![]() |
Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
One of my pet peeves with some sequels is that writers have to STRIP the "happily ever after" from the protagonist in order to propel the story forward.
Didn't you just hate it when: (SPOILERS) Rocky Balboa became poor again? Laurie Strode didn't beat Michael Myers after all? Elisabeth Shue dumped Ralph Macchio' s ass? It's a sure fire way that the sequel can never be as good as the original. What d o y'all think? |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Whoops! Can a mod move this to Movies?
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Luke Skywalker losing his hand in ESB.
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Bruce Willis dies again in The Seventh Sense.
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
You must not have liked Alien 3.
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by dugan
(Post 12086775)
You must not have liked Alien 3.
Perfect example. I don't mind if Luke loses a hand, or if Han goes frozen, as long as there is an end goal. |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
:shrug: I dunno. I think it works for me. I once heard that writing a three-act narrative is basically:
Act I - Get your hero up in the tree. Act II - Throw apples at him. Act III - Get your hero down from the tree. In a trilogy, the first sequel (Act II) would see the hero lose everything. Personally, I absolutely love the cliffhanger ending of Back to the Future II, as well as the final shot of The Godfather II. The alternative is a rehash of the original. Men in Black II springs to mind. |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Does this mean Batman will swoop in and take Lois from Superman?
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by story
(Post 12086789)
:shrug: I dunno. I think it works for me. I once heard that writing a three-act narrative is basically:
Act I - Get your hero up in the tree. Act II - Throw apples at him. Act III - Get your hero down from the tree. In a trilogy, the first sequel (Act II) would see the hero lose everything. Personally, I absolutely love the cliffhanger ending of Back to the Future II, as well as the final shot of The Godfather II. The alternative is a rehash of the original. Men in Black II springs to mind. Good point. But what if there isn't an Act III in mind when ACT II is written? |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
The Negotiator 2: "Now you're going to have to deal with one of us!"
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Karate Kid 2.
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Not in the movies, but Jack Bauer.
Saves many American lives, stops kidnappings, assassinations, terrorist attacks, but is now a wanted fugitive and on the run. |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Friday The 13th Part II. Alice dies in the opening reel.
Ghostbusters 2. Sued by the city. Everyone thinks they're a joke. That it was a hoax. (Thank God for the Scolari brothers). |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by jeffkjoe
(Post 12086781)
Alien 3 was the WORST offender of this.
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
superman 2: gives up being a superhero
spider-Man 2: gives up being a superhero dark knight rises: put hero in a hole for 2/3 of the movie |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by Jory
(Post 12086864)
That movie didn't go where it did because anyone thought it made any sort of narrative sense; it's because nobody had a damn clue what they were doing. Reading the history of Alien 3 is much more interesting than watching the film. The long summary on the movie's Wikipedia page is the short version. The whole process was such a giant fuck-up because, unlike Alien and Aliens, nobody had a clear vision for it. The attitude was less "now this is where the series should go next" and more "well the last one made money, so I guess we should throw together another one." Countless scripts were solicited, rejected, combined, and marinated in a casserole dish filled with piss, and the filming was constantly interfered with. The fact that it's even halfway watchable and coherent is sort of amazing.
Had they written it so that all 4 survivors from ALIENS come back and fight for at least some portion of the movie would've given the audience what they really wanted. I could buy only Newt and Ripley surviving, bc so much of that core story is the mother/daughter relationship staying intact. |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by Chadm
(Post 12086854)
Ghostbusters 2. Sued by the city. Everyone thinks they're a joke. That it was a hoax. (Thank God for the Scolari brothers).
And I'm not sure how people could suddenly dismiss the guys after they witnessed a giant marshmallow man appear in the city. Not sure how you forget that after 20 years, let alone a paltry five. I think I could take "hero loses everything" over "let's use a flimsy excuse to tell the same story as the first movie all over again". |
A happy character doesn't make for very interesting storytelling. It's the conundrum that's plagued comics for years: anytime there's actual character development and progress and resolution, it has to be undone to make the story to back to status quo. So many sequels are just bigger-budgeted remakes that it's bound to be a chronic problem with movies too.
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
I hated the beginning of Iron Eagle II (but give horror movie sequels a pass for similar openings).
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Every damn Metroid game after the first one. :mad:
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by UAIOE
(Post 12086918)
I could buy the "nobody cares anymore" if a long stretch of time had passed since they did anything, but 5 years? No.
And I'm not sure how people could suddenly dismiss the guys after they witnessed a giant marshmallow man appear in the city. Not sure how you forget that after 20 years, let alone a paltry five. I think I could take "hero loses everything" over "let's use a flimsy excuse to tell the same story as the first movie all over again". |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by RocShemp
(Post 12086935)
I hated the beginning of Iron Eagle II (but give horror movie sequels a pass for similar openings).
Although I heard that they brought him back in one of the later DTV sequels. I suppose you could say the same for the GI Joe sequel as well. |
Originally Posted by Supermallet
(Post 12086950)
Every damn Metroid game after the first one. :mad:
|
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Originally Posted by jeffkjoe
(Post 12086808)
Good point.
But what if there isn't an Act III in mind when ACT II is written? |
Re: Don't you just hate it when the hero loses EVERYTHING in the sequel?
Not a movie, but NYPD Blue's Andy "How many friends and family of mine are you going to kill?!" Sipowicz agrees with the OP. :)
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:25 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.