A Quote by Edgar Wright

I tire of franchises, remakes, and endless sequels. — © Edgar Wright
I tire of franchises, remakes, and endless sequels.
You know for years before the notion of sequels, actors were the franchise. John Wayne would rarely do sequels, but he kind of played the same guy with a different name in every movie. I have no problem with using actors as franchises. And that's what is fun to do.
I have an allergy to sequels and remakes in general.
A lot of the time, the scripts you get to read are remakes or reboots or sequels or prequels.
with all these tentpoles, franchises, reboots and sequels, is there still room for movies in the movie business?
I'm not much on sequels; I'm not much on remakes for the most part. I don't really like or dislike them.
Maybe Oliver Stone doesn't lend himself well to remakes or sequels, because he does them so well the first time.
I'm proud of all the movies I've made. They're not sequels, they're not franchises. And the reason I pick my films carefully is that I don't want to spit on my life. I like to think of myself as more than that.
The film industry is run by multinational media conglomerates and they have their perspective on what they need from their product. That's why we live in an era where you see reboots and sequels and remakes and prequels, all these old presents are re-wrapped and offered up as new gifts.
Nobody does remakes for the sake of it. As for me, I have not hard and fast rules with respect to remakes.
I've always said that with a lot of the horror franchises that I've started, it's like directing a pilot. I come in, I direct the first movie and all these directors come in and direct all the sequels after me and hey have to kind of retain the look, the tone, and the characters.
Generally I don't like doing remakes, but I think that's more in the cynical world of Hollywood where normally remakes are purely for commercial reasons.
The film studios learned to our dismay but to their pleasure that if they spent $200 million making a film they could make half a billion on it. So they were not interested anymore in quality films... They can't afford to be that risky at those prices. Consequently you're getting a lot of remakes, sequels, dopey comedies full of toilet jokes...
Most people know me at Pixar as the guy that doesn't like to do sequels or very reluctant to do sequels.
The public never appears to tire of endless courses of strawberries and cream, and the theory that you run the risk of boring people with endless photo montages of the Chelsea Pensioners in their dress reds, or close-ups of a Pimm's Cup sprouting all kinda of flora, has yet to be proven. People like Wimbledon in the same way they like blue jeans or even their own spouses: for the pleasure yielded by their reliable sameness.
The thing I do miss about the way some sequels were in the past was that each film felt like its own unique, complete tone. Now, sequels are tonal facsimiles of the ones before them, like a television series, whereas back in the past sequels would often be radically different from the ones before.
When a tire blows, you simply accept that this is the here and now reality of your life. You've lost the tire, but that doesn't mean that you have to lose your peace and serenity. Now, serenely, begin to take the necessary steps in order the change the tire.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!