Serious question, mind-straining, please help!

Posted by Shawnkara from spider-wj063.proxy.aol.com (205.188.198.48) on Monday, November 05, 2001 at 10:57am :

Do you recall in 'Stand By Me' when the boys are discussing Disney characters and they nearly have a seizure because they can't de cide what Goofy is? That has happened to me and I need help! I was watching the making of 'Hannibal' last night. There's a part where Dino DeLaurentis says, "Hannibal is not a sequel to 'Silence of the Lambs'. It's a sequel to the characters, but not 'Silence of the Lambs'." This got me thinking because it's true, of ALL movies. Let me explain.....
To me a sequel is a second film that continues to tell the same story. At least that's what I thought. Each of the three Indy films stands alone without the other two. The stories are not at all related. This is the case with most so-called "sequels". If more than two are made then it's a trilogy. Over three? A saga. 'Star Wars' and 'Scream' are trilogies. Well, I guess SW is a saga now. The Indy films are just films, each unto their own. I've thought and thought and can't think of any stories that continue through only two films. My conclusion? There is, by its definition, no such thing as a sequel. What do you guys think?

SILENT LAMB STUDIO Indy 16 scale figures and accessories Follow Ups: Settling the Pluto/Goofy furor... - Belosch 5:08pm 11/06/2001 Well... - The Autumn Kid 4:46pm 11/05/2001 How about Star Trek II + III? (nm) - James 12:56pm 11/05/2001 Post a Followup Name: E-Mail: ( default ) Subject: Message: : Do you recall in 'Stand By Me' when the boys are discussing Disney characters and they nearly have a seizure because they can't de cide what Goofy is? That has happened to me and I need help! I was watching the making of 'Hannibal' last night. There's a part where Dino DeLaurentis says, "Hannibal is not a sequel to 'Silence of the Lambs'. It's a sequel to the characters, but not 'Silence of the Lambs'." This got me thinking because it's true, of ALL movies. Let me explain..... : To me a sequel is a second film that continues to tell the same story. At least that's what I thought. Each of the three Indy films stands alone without the other two. The stories are not at all related. This is the case with most so-called "sequels". If more than two are made then it's a trilogy. Over three? A saga. 'Star Wars' and 'Scream' are trilogies. Well, I guess SW is a saga now. The Indy films are just films, each unto their own. I've thought and thought and can't think of any stories that continue through only two films. My conclusion? There is, by its definition, no such thing as a sequel. What do you guys think? Optional Link ( default ) URL: Title: Optional Image Link ( default ) URL: This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com