A Quote by Barry Sonnenfeld

By definition a sequel can't be original. So you've got to figure out what worked the first time around. — © Barry Sonnenfeld
By definition a sequel can't be original. So you've got to figure out what worked the first time around.
It was a film [The Lost World], and it's a sequel at the same time. The first shot on the first day was from the sequel to the movie they hadn't made yet. But yeah, it was a pretty amazing experience running around the jungle for that.
People will turn their noses up at a sequel or that type of thing, but Pixar really works hard - if they're making a sequel - to make a sequel an original movie, to make it an original story.
I think there are some people that are capable of making a sequel more special than the original. And we have seen that when the original 'Terminator' came out, then Jim Cameron outdid himself with the sequel. Then it became the highest grossing movie of the year when it came out in 1991.
Courage, the original definition of courage, when it first came into the English language -- it's from the Latin word "cor," meaning "heart" - and the original definition was to tell the story of who you are with your whole heart.
A sequel is going to be a pressure no matter who directs it. A sequel is only made when the original film works.
I finished my first novel - it was around 300 pages long - when I was 16. Wrote one more before I got out of high school, then wrote the first Lincoln Perry novel when I was 19. It didn't sell, but I liked the character and I knew the world so I tried what was, in my mind, a sequel. Wrote that when I was 20, and that one made it.
When I first did 'The Fast and the Furious', I didn't want there to be a sequel on the first one. I thought, 'Why would you rush to do a sequel - just because your first film is successful?'
I cannot explain why they made that sequel to Secret of NIMH. Because they claim that it the original didn't make money, so what was the enthusiasm to make a sequel?
What the world is like from a nine-year-old's point of view? My memory is that nothing is explained to you, you've got to try to figure it out, pick up clues from the people around you, try to figure it out from their reactions.
If you do something that's different and quirky and original, it takes time for people to figure it out.
The only reason I would write a sequel is if I were struck by an idea that I felt to be equal to the original. Too many sequels diminish the original.
When I was around eleven or twelve, my board got hung up on the top of a bowl, and I got a concussion, and I knocked my teeth out. That was the first time that I got seriously injured, and I was taken to the hospital in an ambulance, and my parents briefly doubted.
It's tough to make a sequel that stands up to the original especially one that has, over the course of time, become a bit of a cult favorite.
I got my first computer in the 6th grade or so. As soon as I got it, I was interested in finding out how it worked and how the programs worked and then figuring out how to write programs at just deeper and deeper levels within the system.
Maybe because I'm a child of the '80s, but for me, a sequel is a story that follows the previous one, and sometimes if you haven't seen the original, then you don't understand the second one. Like 'Back to the Future 2.' If you haven't seen the first one, you're not going to get anything out of 'Back to the Future 2.'
I mean, comedy's hard. If you go back and look at the first season of Seinfeld, it's a work in progress and that's what happens. It just take time for people to figure each other out, and figure out timing, and to develop creatively with the writers.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!