When you get right down to it, sequels are unnecessary. Just about any film ever to have a sequel was fine ending the way it did the first time around. Even the classic ending of Back to the Future, with Doc Brown taking Marty to the future to save his children, was originally meant as a joke. But that’s just the way of such films, victims of their own success. This isn’t to say that sequels are bad. Some of my favorite films of all time (including the Back to the Future films) are sequels. But even I’ll admit that they weren’t particularly necessary. Terminator 2 and Aliens are great films, but the characters and their stories had fitting ends in their respective preceding films. I think they stand the test of time because of how creative the filmmakers were in doing something different within their respective universes (Funny that two of the most memorable action sequels of all-time were directed by the same man). Fundamentally, sequels are conceived with the sole purpose of capitalizing on the success of the film that precedes it. If filmmakers manage to tell a new and engaging story and build on pre-existing character arcs, it’s usually just an unexpected bonus. And while a lot of people focus on sequels in general, and the ever-increasing number of them we see in theaters these days, I’m more focused on what I call “Sequels: In Name Only”.

Now, with the ever-evolving direct-to-DVD market, we’re seeing more DVD-exclusive sequels to big-budget theatrical films than ever. Usually, these films are lucky if they can even retain one actor from the original film, and usually that’s enough for the studios (see: American Pie – Band Camp, featuring Eugene Levy). Barring that, they can either recast a major character, or even have a new main character with some loose relation to a character from the original. Then there’s just blatant copying of an original film’s storyline, incorporating a whole slew of different characters. The result is a collection of soon-to-be classics like American Psycho 2, Save the Last Dance 2, the seemingly never-ending series of Bring It On films, and even Road House 2!! I’m just baffled as to where the demand for these follow-ups even comes from?!? Were people really clamoring for a sequel to Road House?!? You mean while I anxiously await the day someone decides to make a sequel to Kuffs (like Christian Slater and Milla Jovovich have anything better to do!), Someone actually dug up this turd from Patrick Swayze’s heyday, and deemed it worthy of re-visitation?!?! BLASPHEMY!! And I swear to God, people REALLY need to stop making Hellraiser sequels!!! It’s so to the point that Doug Bradley just pops up for ten seconds to say, “Remember me, I’m Pinhead! Well, see ya next time!!”

But to truly experience the headbanging, teeth-grating, hair pulling banality of the SINO phenomenon, one need look no further than such recent films as Behind Enemy Lines 2: The Axis of Evil, 8mm 2, and Young Adolescent Behavior: Havoc 2. What needs to be addressed is the fact that films like these, more often than not, were never meant to have ANY relation to the films they claim to be sequels of!! For whatever reason, the studios believe that connecting these direct-to-DVD offerings to pre-existing films will increase their marketability. It’s a halfway decent idea on paper, but I’d like to think they’d look to more successful films than Behind Enemy Lines, and especially Havoc, to piggyback on. Who even SAW Havoc?!? More appropriately, who saw Havoc and thought it was a good film?!? The scene with gang members running a train on Bijou Phillips and Anna Hathaway didn’t even hold my attention! If anything, “Young Adolescent Behavior” should be the banner under which all films about slutty, over-privileged white kids, should reside. Going by that logic retroactively, Young Adolescent Behavior: Havoc 2 should really be titled “Young Adolescent Behavior: Part 2,369”. The sad thing is that I’m probably rounding that number down!

And at the end of the day, you have to wonder how these lesser-known filmmakers feel, having a film they meant to be totally original (relatively speaking, anyway) get slapped with the title of some other film with no connection at all to their work. That’s not to say that all their films would even be worth seeing, but at least potential viewers wouldn’t have any pre-conceived notions. Better for a film to be judged on its own merit, than judged based on external factors.