4 Comments
Oct 19Liked by Sian Nelligan

I'm thinking about the impact of Netflix sequels intended to stretch out a good quality, contained show into a profitable series versus something like Grey's Anatomy which has the exact same intentions but is potentially self aware enough to pull it off? Like so we need a 21st season recycling the same plot lines with different actors? Probably not. But I'm going to consumer every second and enjoy it.

Expand full comment
author

You raise such a good point. I think what I was trying to say (and failing) was the extension of ideas that weren’t really planted in the original content being capitalised on. Like, Stranger Things for example, was always meant to have more than one season and that’s obvious as you watch it. The same with Greys Anatomy, despite having 745 seasons 😂 but I’m the same. I’ll complain about it but it’ll somethings got enough hype or interests me enough, I’ll gobble it up!!

Expand full comment

Love this, Sian. I loathe sequels. They're a lazy way to try and capitalize on somebody else's idea. Rarely do they work. Why not just rerun the original? Because there's not as money in it. That said, "A Star in Born" didn't feel like the original. It was more of a modern re-telling, which is what I'm guessing the Alderton version of Pride and Prejudice will be.

Expand full comment
author

Thank you so much, Bonnie!! Sequels are so tough, I think they’re also getting worse because we are just inundated with so much content all the time that a sequel isn’t going to perform as well if it isn’t done perfectly and most of the time, I don’t think they are or are needed in the first place. Yes I’m so intrigued to see if it will be a period drama or a modern setting, either way, I know I will devour it 😂

Expand full comment