The tunes review of what’s new the MC Music Man takes on: Animal Liberation Orchestra

By: Chris Fort
Contributing Writer

So, you’re sitting there in the movie theatre, anticipating the start of the hot new flick everyone’s been talking about while you chow down on popcorn you couldn’t resist mounting with gallons of hot, delicious butter. As you watch the seemingly endless series of previews for new films, chances are there’s going to be one familiar detail lurking in most of them: they’re not an original idea. Now, unless you’ve been cryogenically frozen for the entire 21st century you know that Hollywood has been making a heck of a lot of sequels lately. Sequels, prequels, remakes; if it’s been done before, it’ll be done again.

And why is that? Why are there so many movies with words like “Part 2” or “The Beginning” in the title? Not surprisingly, the answer has to do with something colored green. Money is the main factor in the recent boom of sequels in the movie industry. After all, Hollywood production studios rake in hundreds of millions of dollars every year from box office revenue. It’s big business and there’s a lot of money to be made, and lost, in the production of a ninety-minute feature-length film. So, rather than risk millions on a new story, they recycle old ones and pray that name recognition alone will be good for a couple of zeroes next to their box office gross statistics.

What’s more, making sequels usually works in getting people into theatres. Film genres like “Shrek” and “Pirates of the Caribbean” appeared at the top of year-end box office lists with their first sequels, subsequently assuring that there’ll be more of them very soon. Other times, however, Hollywood will misfire and make a colossal mistake with a sequel, tarnishing their checkbooks as well as the memory of the original (“The Ring 2” made me laugh). Every now and then, film studios will try and capitalize on a film that was only marginally profitable the first time around because, well, because they don’t have to think of anything new. The result is a movie that turns the notches up on guns, explosions and fast cars, but lacks any other substantial reason to shell out eight bucks to see it. I mean, did we really need “Bad Boys 2”?

Not all copycat ideas are sequels though. Sometimes studios will create prequels to a movie because they ended the possibility of a sequel in the first film. Then we get to see details on how Leatherface first acquired a love of motor-driven weaponry in the “Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning,” or how Anakin Skywalker becomes the dreaded Darth Vader in episodes 1-3 of “Star Wars.”

Other times, Hollywood will remake a movie because they think the public’s forgotten about the first one. “The Punisher,” first made in 1989, is a good example. Reproducing old blockbusters deprives us of truly sensational and unique films that leave us better off for having seen them. You know the ones I’m talking about.

Still, browsing through upcoming releases, I can already see it’s going to be another sequel/prequel-packed February, with titles like “Hannibal Rising” and “Shrek the Third” lighting up my computer screen. Maybe I should just lighten up. After all, sequels aren’t necessarily a bad thing. In fact, they’re often very entertaining. They sometimes complete or enhance the story from the first film. And who wouldn’t want to see the MacManus brothers continue their quest for justice in another “Boondock Saints” film? On the other hand though, glancing at the list of Oscar-nominated movies, I found that there’s something familiar in all of them: they’re all original work. So go ahead Hollywood movie studio. Squeeze out as much as you can from Rocky’s boxing gloves before Sylvestor Stallone is too old to strap them on anymore. Pump out as many “Saw” sequels as you can. We’ll go see them. Just don’t plan on writing an acceptance speech anytime soon.