From Mav: A couple weeks ago, I saw an article announcing that there is going to be a sequel to the 2013 indie teen sex crime neo-noir dark comedy erotic thriller (it has a lot genres!) Spring Breakers. The headline caught my attention because I love that movie. So I read it found out that it was going to be directed by Matthew Bright and will apparently star Bella Thorne, Ariel Martin, Grace Van Dien, and True Whitaker. Ok, so I’m not surprised that the cast has changed. It’s fundamentally a story about teens on spring break, and the original cast is now well into their 30s. But it appears that not only is the cast being replaced, writer/director Harmony Korine is also not returning and instead being replaced by Matthew Bright.
I actually saw a couple random movie sites try to argue that this was a soulless cash grab. Except, it’s not. Because no one actually cares about Spring Breakers! Sure, it was profitable; it made like $30M on a $5M budget. In fact, I’m fairly certain it’s easily Harmony Korine’s highest grossing film. But that was almost an accident! No one with any kind of sense about anything can possibly be expecting that to happen again. There’s not like a bunch of Spring Breakers mega fans running around. I bet many people reading this have never even heard of the film. This isn’t some beloved classic. It’s not even a cult classic. It’s an obscure flick beloved pretty much only by weirdo film nerds. There must be like more than 12 of us, spread all across the planet! And fans of Matthew Bright… there’s even fewer.
Now I actually like Matthew Bright. Or at the very least I think he’s an extremely interesting filmmaker. Freeway in particular is an amazing movie that I actually adore. And I think a lot of his other films were… let’s say “interesting” choices. And the sequel Freeway 2: Confessions of a Trickbaby, is in that “interesting choices” category. It’s not nearly as good and it’s not really much of a sequel. It’s … a movie about some other girls, who happen to be on another freeway. There are some thematic connections but that’s it. And Bright hasn’t actually made a new movie in literally a couple decades (his last film was 2002), but that’s neither here nor there. What I am more curious about is how is Spring Breakers: Salvation Mountain a sequel? This isn’t based on some well known IP. If none of the cast is returning and it’s got a different creative team, then isn’t it really just “the story of four different girls on another vacation?”
So that made me think “how connected does something need to be to be a sequel?” In comics, at least from the bigger companies, the connections tend to be based on characters or at least some tenuous connection to the ongoing continuity. For instance, the Avengers and X-men comics have constantly changing casts and creative teams, but there’s a presumption of continuity for the concept of the teams. And I feel like that can work for novel or film series. For instance in the Dune or Star Wars worlds, the continuity might span thousands of years, but it feels connected by some level of world building. The New Mutants and Rogue One movies feel like a part of their franchises even if their connections are a bit tenuous.
But then I look at something like Twisters from last year. A film which I actually really liked, but it’s essentially a sequel in name only. There’s the absolute vaguest of references to the previous film, but it might as well be just another movie about tornados. Similarly, Lisa Frankenstein (which I never got around to watching, but should) apparently has easter eggs that connect it to Jennifer’s Body but at least those are the same film maker. Honestly, for most of these. they about as connected as the seven films in the Bring It On film series which basically says “well, they all have cheerleaders in them” and that’s it. Or even more so the Poison Ivy or Wild Things film franchise which I guess the connection is… I dunno… “sometimes people have sex”? I guess? But by that token we might as well just say “they all happen on planet earth.”
So that’s what I want to talk about. What is the bare minimum for something to be considered “a sequel” and if something is to be considered such… should it be? Is it better to stand on its own or is there value in the connected world building. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
Call For Comments: So what is a sequel, anyway?
June 4, 2025
From Mav: A couple weeks ago, I saw an article announcing that there is going to be a sequel to the 2013 indie teen sex crime neo-noir dark comedy erotic thriller (it has a lot genres!) Spring Breakers. The headline caught my attention because I love that movie. So I read it found out that it was going to be directed by Matthew Bright and will apparently star Bella Thorne, Ariel Martin, Grace Van Dien, and True Whitaker. Ok, so I’m not surprised that the cast has changed. It’s fundamentally a story about teens on spring break, and the original cast is now well into their 30s. But it appears that not only is the cast being replaced, writer/director Harmony Korine is also not returning and instead being replaced by Matthew Bright.
I actually saw a couple random movie sites try to argue that this was a soulless cash grab. Except, it’s not. Because no one actually cares about Spring Breakers! Sure, it was profitable; it made like $30M on a $5M budget. In fact, I’m fairly certain it’s easily Harmony Korine’s highest grossing film. But that was almost an accident! No one with any kind of sense about anything can possibly be expecting that to happen again. There’s not like a bunch of Spring Breakers mega fans running around. I bet many people reading this have never even heard of the film. This isn’t some beloved classic. It’s not even a cult classic. It’s an obscure flick beloved pretty much only by weirdo film nerds. There must be like more than 12 of us, spread all across the planet! And fans of Matthew Bright… there’s even fewer.
Now I actually like Matthew Bright. Or at the very least I think he’s an extremely interesting filmmaker. Freeway in particular is an amazing movie that I actually adore. And I think a lot of his other films were… let’s say “interesting” choices. And the sequel Freeway 2: Confessions of a Trickbaby, is in that “interesting choices” category. It’s not nearly as good and it’s not really much of a sequel. It’s … a movie about some other girls, who happen to be on another freeway. There are some thematic connections but that’s it. And Bright hasn’t actually made a new movie in literally a couple decades (his last film was 2002), but that’s neither here nor there. What I am more curious about is how is Spring Breakers: Salvation Mountain a sequel? This isn’t based on some well known IP. If none of the cast is returning and it’s got a different creative team, then isn’t it really just “the story of four different girls on another vacation?”
So that made me think “how connected does something need to be to be a sequel?” In comics, at least from the bigger companies, the connections tend to be based on characters or at least some tenuous connection to the ongoing continuity. For instance, the Avengers and X-men comics have constantly changing casts and creative teams, but there’s a presumption of continuity for the concept of the teams. And I feel like that can work for novel or film series. For instance in the Dune or Star Wars worlds, the continuity might span thousands of years, but it feels connected by some level of world building. The New Mutants and Rogue One movies feel like a part of their franchises even if their connections are a bit tenuous.
But then I look at something like Twisters from last year. A film which I actually really liked, but it’s essentially a sequel in name only. There’s the absolute vaguest of references to the previous film, but it might as well be just another movie about tornados. Similarly, Lisa Frankenstein (which I never got around to watching, but should) apparently has easter eggs that connect it to Jennifer’s Body but at least those are the same film maker. Honestly, for most of these. they about as connected as the seven films in the Bring It On film series which basically says “well, they all have cheerleaders in them” and that’s it. Or even more so the Poison Ivy or Wild Things film franchise which I guess the connection is… I dunno… “sometimes people have sex”? I guess? But by that token we might as well just say “they all happen on planet earth.”
So that’s what I want to talk about. What is the bare minimum for something to be considered “a sequel” and if something is to be considered such… should it be? Is it better to stand on its own or is there value in the connected world building. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
Share this:
Related