John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Sequels have little to do with whether the material it follows is any good, right? In Hollywood anyway every flick is a potential series.You're correct about the quality -- sequels are often made from awful films. But the main factor is the profitability. There used to be a fairly reliable formula about how much money a sequel would make, given the box office of the first film. If that number was less than what the film would cost, the sequel wasn't made. I'd say that formula is no longer reliable, but the principle remains the same: if the first film tanks, no one's going to invest in the second in the hope it will do better.