This is Why Most Sequels Suck
We’ve all heard it before, “the second one wasn’t as good as the original.” And most of the time, they are right. Most sequels suck compared to the original or the first in the series. But it’s not for the reason that you think.
It’s not the plot or the special effects. It’s the story.
I know what you’re thinking — but the plot is not the story. The story is the characters’ internal transformation; the plot is simply an external tool that forces the character to undergo that transformation.
In storytelling, something happens to the character (a “wound” or “ghost”) that causes them to form a misbelief about the world, causing them to see it in a certain way. The plot puts the characters through the wringer and forces them to make a change and confront that misbelief (most of the time for the better) so they can learn a lesson (the “theme”) and solve the problem the plot presents.
In other words, you come for the plot but stay for the character transformation. The character transformation is what sucks us in — it’s what makes us want to root for the character and keep us hooked until the end. We want to see if and how the characters will rise to the challenge and defeat their inner demons so they can defeat the big bad villain.
Hence, the reason why most sequels suck is that there is no significant transformation the characters go through in the subsequent installments. I’m willing to argue that all of the characters go through their transformation in the first of the series, leaving little left for the rest of the series. Even if the plot is good, if the character doesn’t grow in some way throughout, it leaves us saying that it was just “ok.”
Plot-driven installments don’t move us; story-driven ones do.
To write a good character, you must think of it in an arc throughout the series. Each installment forces the character to transform significantly to complete their overall character arc. By the end of the series, the character is in a completely different place from where they started. The transformation should be significant enough at the end of each installment to show apparent change and growth for the character.
They need to dig deep and become a new version of themselves to attack the problem (the plot) at hand — and keep doing that every installment.
The characters also can’t backtrack or deal with the same demons they did in the first installment. While they haven’t yet completed their character arc, they at least need to demonstrate they made progress towards it.
Take the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), for example. One reason I love the MCU is its storytelling. However, it’s no secret that most of its sequels are bad, especially in Phase 4 and beyond (sorry, not sorry). The reason is the lack of storytelling and character growth in the sequels.
But there are a few series and characters that do this well. Tony Stark is one of them (warning, spoilers ahead):
Tony Stark/Iron Man
In my opinion, Tony Stark had the most character growth and development of all the Avengers throughout his own trilogy and the entire Infinity Saga.
When we see him at the beginning of Iron Man, he’s this selfish, ego-centric billionaire ignorant about how much destruction his weapons cause. We also learn the story question that guides Tony’s entire character arc: his legacy, something he battles with throughout the installments.
Throughout the movie, we see him transform into Iron Man, who wants to use the technology he and his company create for good. This character arc gets pushed further in the second and third movies, where the plot forces him to look at who he is and what he stands for without the Iron Man suit.
But his character arc still needs to be completed; we still experience Tony as a selfish narcissist who, while he wants a piece of the action, has yet to fully come to terms with what it means to become a true hero and the sacrifice that takes.
When he sacrifices himself at the end of “Avengers: Endgame,” Tony Stark has completed his character arc and learned what it takes to be a true hero and the legacy he leaves behind.
On the other hand, there are a few characters whose entire growth and transformation happen in the first installment, leaving their sequels lackluster. Thor is one example:
Thor
Don’t get me wrong — “Thor” was great. But the sequels leave something to be desired.
In the first movie, Thor transforms from an arrogant god to someone who understands what it means to be a worthy king. He answers the story question of this character arc by being deemed worthy and ready to take the throne of Asgard by his father, the Son of Odin.
Thor is an example of a character arc that doesn’t go beyond the first movie. In the rest of the tetralogy and even throughout the rest of the Infinity War Saga, we don’t see huge character growth and strides from Thor.
Each movie after the first in the series is the definition of “dude with a problem” (especially “Ragnarok” and “Love and Thunder”). They are plot-driven and very reactionary to solving the external problem rather than digging deep to solve the internal problem.
It’s only at the end of the movie that we see some growth and transformation, but it’s not clear exactly what demon he’s facing.
While we see Thor move away from wanting to rule Asgard and instead defend the universe, he deals roughly with the same demon—worthiness—and seems to move backward instead of forward (especially in “Avengers: Endgame”).
If anything, we see more character development from Loki than we do from Thor. Though it’s slow, we see Loki what it means to stand out of his brother’s shadow and be a hero in his own right.
I love a good sequel as much as the next person—but only if the characters are written well. Character development keeps us hooked because we want to see if they will rise to the occasion against all odds (internal and external) to defeat the villain.
So next time you watch or read something, think about why you’re hooked on it — is it because of the character or the plot?
