On Oct. 30, “The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day” was released, several years after the original. The first film is one of my personal favorites, which is why I can’t wait for it to be officially released in DeKalb.

But other than giving me something to look forward to, the release of the cult classic’s second installment prompted me to think about something important: why do some sequels fail and ultimately, what makes an effective one?

My movie viewing history also played a part in this inquiry. Over the years, I’ve seen my fair share of disappointing sequels.

“Home Alone 3,” for example, tarnished the “Home Alone” franchise, much like “Jurassic Park 3” made dinosaurs stale and boring. In both of these cases, a weak plot and changes in the cast contributed to the failures of the films.

Movies like “Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls” and “Ghostbusters 2” have also fallen short in trying to recapture the fun and imagination of the original.

Despite flops like these, filmmakers still see sequels as lucrative because they have the potential to capitalize on the success of original box office hits. But as I have mentioned, this strategy often goes awry.

That’s because sequels have to be their own animal. Even if they’re a continuation of the first movie (rather than a set of new circumstances involving the characters), they must still be able to make a unique impression on the viewer.

This can be accomplished in a variety of ways. First, the acting must take a definitive step forward. An improvement in the believability of a character goes a long way in adding depth and humanity to the story.

Second, the plot must grow new legs. If it feels too much like the original, or doesn’t do enough to differentiate itself, then the overall quality suffers. Viewers shouldn’t be sitting in their seats saying things like “that’s just like the first one” or “that happened the same way last time.”

That being said, sequels should always incorporate some of the same elements that made the original a hit. This is easier said than done, but some of the best sequels ever made have been able to find the correct balance between originality and familiarity.

Finally, a good sequel will pose the ultimate movie-goer question: is this better than the original (or any previous installments)? And the sequel doesn’t necessarily have to better, only good enough to make us think about which one is our favorite.

Hopefully, “The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day” will force me to ponder this question.

All comments are moderated before being published. We will not edit your comments, but we also will not approve those that are abusive, off-topic, attack another poster or contain information we know to be libelous or false.

During peak weekday viewing times, most comments will be reviewed within six hours. For more detailed information, click here.

After submitting your comment, check below for a confirmation message.

• Your name:
• Enter text from image:
  

• Your comment:

* 300-character count. HTML formatting will not display.