more by MaryAnn

dogs must be carried | by maryann johanson

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Amazon author
tumblr
Pinterest
RSS

question of the day: Why are sequels so often unimaginatively named?

Star Trek Into Darkness

We’ve got two movies opening soon-ish that are sequels to other films, yet have eschewed the usual boring Blow ’Em Up 3: The Explosioning sort of titles. Star Trek Into Darkness actually makes you think about the fact that the “trek” part of the title is actually a verb. And yes, A Good Day to Die Hard sounds as if it, too, might be a Star Trek movie focusing on Klingons, but at least it’s trying to do something fresh with its title.
Is it just me? Am I the only one mystified by why more sequels aren’t more creatively titled? I get that there’s supposed to be name recognition built into a film’s title if it’s a sequel, but these two titles demonstrate that there’s still room for some fun. And yet we hardly ever see that sort of fun happening.

Why are sequels so often unimaginatively named? How might you rename some sequel titles to ramp up the fun? What sequel titles would you invent for films you’d like to see?

(If you have a suggestion for a QOTD, feel free to email me. Responses to this QOTD sent by email will be ignored; please post your responses here.)


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/flick/public_html/wptest/wp-content/themes/FlickFilosopher/loop-single.php on line 104