Why Shouldn’t A Sequel Be Better Than The Original?

June 2016Words by Mr Adam Welch

Mr Irving Kershner and Mr Mark Hamill in Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, 1980. Photograph by Lucas Film/Walt Disney/Photoshot

What do you do when you have a hit film on your hands? If you’re Hollywood, the immediate answer is: Make another one! Make a third! Make it a franchise! Flog it to death! But, as many of this spring’s hotly anticipated second acts have failed to fly ­– The Huntsman: Winter's War, Zoolander 2 and X-Men: Apocalypse all performed poorly at the box office – studios are growing twitchy that the summer’s slate of follow-ups, including Independence Day: Resurgence, the new all-female Ghostbusters, and Star Trek Beyond, may not live up to the legend of their movie DNA.

It doesn’t have to be this way though; second bites don’t necessarily leave a bad taste. Some sequels have actually improved upon the (already mighty) original. We at MR PORTER invite you to ruminate on the following, for example:

The Godfather: Part II (1974)