A Quote by Travis Knight

I take a firm stand against sequels. My industry brethren are a little shocked at how firmly I'm committed to not doing sequels. — © Travis Knight
I take a firm stand against sequels. My industry brethren are a little shocked at how firmly I'm committed to not doing sequels.
Most people know me at Pixar as the guy that doesn't like to do sequels or very reluctant to do sequels.
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.
I would happily have done any of the 'Bourne Identity' sequels. There are good sequels, but I'm not good at making them.
I have to stay interested. I can't do the same thing over and over again, which is why I don't do - I've made sequels, but it's the movies that are not sequels that I enjoy the most.
I'm just trying to think what other sequels there were. There was the James Bond movies and not many. I think sequels have become a recent idea of franchising.
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 think true connectivity is something that is rare in sequels. I mean I love the first 'Die Hard' film; you won't find a bigger 'Die Hard' fan than me. But I feel like with the sequels, they're just taking that character and dropping him in different scenarios. There's no real connective tissue.
Some are wandering into forbidden paths because they are seeking popularity with their peers, even to the extent of doing things they know are wrong. They cannot stand criticism or ridicule and will not take a firm stand against wrongdoing.
We are at a point in the video game industry that the industry is hollowed out. It is out of touch with the zeitgeist, creating sequels and formulaic games over and over again. The energy comes from the indies.
There's nothing wrong with doing sequels, they're just easier to sell.
That's the hardest thing about doing sequels - you've lost the element of surprise.
I'm not big on sequels; I've done them, but I like doing little things that have their own timelessness to them, classic type things, and then you go onto something new.
In 'Scream 2', they have this discussion about how sequels always suck.
There's a real danger in doing a sequel. There are some benefits, but that all hinges on how well you execute. Quite frankly, most sequels don't execute well.
There's a real danger in doing a sequel. There are some benefits, but that all hinges on how well you execute. Quite frankly, most sequels don't execute well
They're just not into doing sequels after Toy Story so I don't think that's a possibility. But if they did, well sure, you'd have to do it. And I'd want to do it.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!