Are moviegoers bombarded with too many sequels? Sometimes I think the movie business would collapse if it weren’t for follow-up films in such popular franchises as Star Wars, Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, Pirates of the Caribbean, Indiana Jones and Shrek. For example, take a look at this release schedule for sequels in 2008:

Rambo (January 25)

Harold & Kumar Escape from Guatanamo Bay (April 25)

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (May 16)

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (May 22)

The Incredible Hulk (June 13)

Hellboy II: The Golden Army (July 11)

The Dark Knight, the new Batman film (July 18)

The X-Files: I Want To Believe (July 25)

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (August 8)

The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 (August 8)

Punisher: War Zone (September 12)

Madagascar 2: The Crate Escape (October 7)

SAW 5 (October 24)

Quantum of Solace, the next James Bond movie (November 7)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (November 21)

Why is Hollywood so dependent on this type of movie? Clearly, it’s because these films make big bucks at the box office. Audiences seem to love them. Shrek 2 earned 400 million domestically and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End raked in close to one billion dollars worldwide.   

Are sequels ever better than -- or even as good as -- the first film? Not often. I don’t believe it’s possible to match the originality and creativity that surprised and delighted us so much in movies like Raiders of the Lost Ark and Star Wars.

What’s the best sequel ever made? I think it’s Spider-Man 2, but National Treasure: Book of Secrets also impressed me. The worst one?  It has to be Seed of Chucky, from the Child’s Play horror franchise.

Whether a sequel is excellent or not, if I’m hooked by characters in the original film, I’ll follow them to the very end of their adventures. I just can't help it -- like many other movie fans, I suffer from a bad case of sequelitis.

(Shrek 2 Poster:  © 2004 DreamWorks. All Rights Reserved.)