What are the best movie sequels ever? A statistical analysis
In 2024, 18 of the 20 highest-grossing films were sequels or prequels. The year's top-rated movie was Dune: Part 2, the highest-grossing film was Inside Out 2, and the biggest box office surprise came from Terrifier 3. It was yet another banner year for recycled ideas.
Since the early 2000s, there has been a sharp increase in sequels, remakes, and prequels, with franchise instalments consistently dominating the 50 highest-grossing films of any given year.
This phenomenon can be traced to several industry trends, including:
High-quality at-home entertainment options
Consolidation among Hollywood studios
Wall Street's need for ever-increasing earnings (via blockbuster hits)
Movie studios seeking to imitate the runaway success of other sequels
This final point lies at the heart of our analysis today: Hollywood thrives on imitation, constantly chasing commercial trends through relentless copy-catting. The entertainment industry's reliance on franchisation didn't occur overnight — rather, it emerged via a half-century of well-received sequels and subpar mimicry.
So today, we'll explore the serialised stories that inspired a generation of studio executives and the modern franchise fare that dared to exceed expectations. We'll identify cinema's greatest sequels based on a range of criteria, including:
Rankings from online databases: The wisdom of film-loving crowds.
Box office success: Movies are a for-profit industry 🙃.
Oscar recognition: The Oscars stink, but sometimes they're useful.
We'll deconstruct aspects of cinematic legacy before pinpointing a handful of consensus selections. Will the internet agree with these rankings? Absolutely not — the internet never does. Will we better understand the series of events that spawned "superhero fatigue" and "sequel-itis"? Certainly.
The "wisdom of crowds" argues that the collective judgment of a diverse group often outperforms that of an individual expert. For example, if you ask 500 people to guess the number of marbles in a fishbowl, the average of these guesses will come remarkably close to the actual number.
In theory, online movie ratings reflect the wisdom of crowds—though this dataset comes with some notable caveats. Internet reviews may skew toward certain demographics (male, younger, etc.), and these decisions are not made independently (since a reviewer can see a film's current score). That said, online databases like Letterboxd, IMDb, and TMDb offer an encyclopedic collection of moviegoer sentiments (and no dataset is perfect).
So, which franchise fare do these somewhat-wise internet crowds enjoy? Our list of highly-rated follow-ups highlights a group of sequels that spawned an army of subpar imitator sequels.
Some observations:
The sequels that forged a template for copycats: Few films have influenced Hollywood project development more than The Dark Knight, Return of the King, and Avengers: Endgame. These films exemplify franchise filmmaking at its best and were rewarded with boatloads of money. So, what happens when studio executives clumsily attempt to replicate these projects? For every well-received sequel, we're inundated with dozens of imitator dumpster fires: The DC Cinematic Universe, Madame Web, Kraven the Hunter, Morbius, Eternals, Joker: Folie à Deux, Catwoman, Battleship, and the live-action adaptation of The Last Airbender.
The 2020s have delivered some outstanding franchise installments: Sequels have become synonymous with a lack of imagination and substandard quality, but that's not always the case. In the right hands — like those of James Cameron or Denis Villeneuve — a follow-up film can delight diehard fans, casual moviegoers, and cinephiles. Post-pandemic, several franchise works have achieved critical acclaim and box office success, including Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse, Dune: Part 2, and Top Gun: Maverick. There is hope!
I've performed several analyses investigating the "best" and "worst" of something, including greatest actors, best movie year, and worst actors. Over time, I've settled on a formula for evaluating cinematic legacy that combines online sentiment, commercial performance, and critical acclaim. It's not perfect, but I am mostly satisfied with the results.
With this in mind, I considered omitting commercial performance from this analysis. While sequels often dominate at the box office, they frequently disappoint critics and casual audiences. However, it's impossible to explain Hollywood's dependence on intellectual property without mentioning ticket sales, so I chose to keep this criterion.
Paradoxically, I enjoyed many of our highest-grossing sequels in isolation, but, as a whole, this list bums me out.
Some observations:
This is a list of the highest-grossing movies of all time (not just sequels): Barring Gone With the Wind, Avatar, Titanic, and Star Wars: A New Hope, this group is nearly 1:1 with the highest-grossing movies in film history. There's a reason why Wall Street has pushed Disney, Paramount, and Warner Brothers toward franchise storytelling.
Most of these movies were released post-2010: Hollywood has a rich history of successful sequels predating the 21st century, including classics like The Godfather Part II, Aliens, and Terminator 2.
However, most films on this list were released in the past 15 years. The most straightforward explanation is that the film industry steadily grew its box office revenues up until 2019 — but there are other factors at play. Many blockbuster sequels of the 20th century were unexpected — a product of serendipity rather than a pre-planned franchise strategy. The Godfather Part II was made in response to the success of its predecessor and happened to be surprisingly great — Paramount was not planning on a Godfather trilogy before Coppola's first instalment.
Now, consider Avengers: Endgame, a movie that culminated a decade of elaborate world-building. Present day, a studio like Disney develops its Marvel and Star Wars properties to be a part of a greater whole in an attempt to maximise the potential of its IP.
Sidenote: Could you imagine if Paramount tried to launch a Godfather Cinematic Universe (GCU)? That would be a tough pill to swallow.
Historically, the Oscars have been allergic to franchise fare. The Academy Awards will gladly recognise each and every music biopic but stop short of rewarding a film that is explicitly derivative. When the academy does acknowledge a sequel, it's because that film is inevitable — so good it can't be ignored.
To assess critical acclaim, I counted Academy Award nominations for top-line Oscar categories, which include Picture, Director, Acting, Writing, Cinematography, Art Direction, and Editing. Why did I omit below-the-line awards like sound design and special effects? Well, traditionally, big-budget films can rack up numerous craft nominations agnostic of the movie's critical reputation.
For instance, a film like Alien: Romulus might earn nods for special effects, sound design, and sound mixing, which are worthy achievements but not indicative of overall acclaim.
These Oscar-recognised sequels mostly match our list of projects with high online ratings.
Some observations:
The supremacy of two Best Picture-winning sequels: The Godfather Part II and Lord of the Rings: Return of the King are the only two sequels to win Best Picture. Many consider Coppola's Godfather follow-up superior to its predecessor, while Return of The King is a triumphant conclusion to an exceptional franchise.
Big Jim (Cameron) does not miss: Director James Cameron simply does not miss. This man has repeatedly helmed "the most expensive movie ever made," to the dismay of the press, and has subsequently produced "the highest-grossing movie of all time."
Cameron's filmography is remarkable: Titanic, Avatar, Aliens, Terminator 1 & 2, True Lies, and The Abyss. I really cannot stress how good this guy is at making movies and money (at the same time). He has propelled three separate franchise sequels — Avatar: Way of Water, Terminator 2, and Aliens — to significant Oscar recognition and box office success. What a guy.
To achieve our final result, we'll stack-rank every film according to our three criteria and then take an average of these rankings. A major caveat to this methodology is its punishment of films with a significant gap in performance (like a lack of box office).
Our final ranking favours The Lord of the Rings franchise, Star Wars, and Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight. The Godfather Part II just barely makes our top 10 — which I'll address (so please avoid throwing your phone/computer on the ground).
When I first developed this methodology, I had no idea what the final outcome would be. I knew Lord of the Rings would rank highly but assumed little beyond that. Ultimately, I'm a bit disappointed with our results—though maybe this was inevitable given my deep-seated disdain for sequels. That said, our final rankings provide a compelling snapshot of Hollywood's evolution, capturing its past and present (and future?):
The triumph and templatisation of Lord of The Rings: The success of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings marked a significant turning point in Hollywood project development. To replicate Jackson's trilogy, studios began targeting intellectual property with built-in fanbases, focusing on grand spectacles laden with CGI effects that could be expanded into multi-instalment franchises.
Why does The Godfather Part II rank so low?: The Godfather Part II was considered a major commercial success (in its time), though its (inflation-adjusted) box office pales in comparison to MCU entries and Star Wars prequels. Put simply, Hollywood has gotten better at making money.
In the 1970s, movie studios often bet on a portfolio of small- to mid-budget films. Studios did not require tentpole hits to prop up their entire operation and were not gearing their release calendars around two or three crucial projects.
Over the past six decades, Hollywood has mastered the art of the blockbuster — from franchise development to overseas marketing to infantilising fan service. If The Godfather Part II came out today, it would likely top this list.
Since I'm a stats nerd who likes movies, I'm frequently told I should develop a proprietary formula for "what makes a movie good." Surely, given my superior data prowess, I should be capable of spotting trends that Hollywood executives cannot, right? Unfortunately no.
If I were to build a predictive model optimising for commercial performance, it would likely justify Hollywood's reliance on sequels. Familiarity, spectacle, CGI, existing fanbases, and serialisation capture the most box office. An original story can make $1 billion, but franchisation will continue as a cornerstone of modern entertainment.
I'll admit this reads as deeply cynical — and that's because it is — but it doesn't have to be all bad. If we're destined for another decade of big-budget sequels, then I'll pose this groundbreaking (perhaps deeply subversive) question: why can't these movies be good?
If anything, this analysis is a testament to the creative potential of franchise fare, so why do so many of these films stink? How can James Cameron elevate three sequels into some of the greatest movies of all time while Vin Deisel's Fast franchise farts out imagination-less car garbage?
Perhaps the cynical environment that breeds these sequels is the problem. In many cases, the content of a single movie is subordinate to the commercial maximisation and never-ending existence of a franchise asset. Hitting a certain release date and generating Comic Con buzz are paramount, while a solid Rotten Tomatoes score and Oscar nominations are futile. Jurassic Park is beloved by generations, so who cares if the newest installment lacks originality, has underdeveloped characters, and is laden with subpar CGI? People want to see T-Rex go "roar" because they enjoyed seeing T-Rex go "roar" in the first five Jurassic Park films.
We've lost the ability to tell standalone stories or mint new intellectual property. Every movie serves as a cog in Disney's ten-year corporate strategy or exists to set up Universal's next round of uninspired car garbage.
With that in mind, I'll offer this plea to Hollywood: could we at least get some thoughtfully-crafted, creatively-inspired car garbage (perhaps directed by James Cameron)? That would be a refreshing twist.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Elio Bombed At The Box Office, But There's A Big Reason I'm Not Worried About Pixar (Yet)
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Pixar was once a seemingly untouchable studio. Every movie the Emeryville, CA studio released seemed to become an overnight hit. The best Pixar movies are some of the best movies ever. From toys come to life to robots in love to superheroes to taking cars, no idea seemed to be too 'out there' to draw in an audience. Today, that's hardly the case. No single movie studio may have been damaged so badly, and for so long, by the global pandemic as Pixar. After seeing several of its films released straight to Disney+, potentially training audiences to watch Pixar movies at home, only Inside Out 2 has been an unqualified success. And from those heights, Pixar has now come crashing down. The big news coming out of the weekend box office is that Pixar had its worst opening weekend of all time with Elio. Despite solid reviews, the movie barely surpassed $20 million at the domestic box office, and its current worldwide tally sits at less than $35 million. It's certainly a significant drop from Inside Out 2, which became the highest-grossing animated movie ever made last summer. Elio's results are seen as a trend for Pixar. There's a feeling that the studio that once could do no wrong can no longer launch successful franchises, as none of the original movies that Pixar has made in the last several years have made a significant impact. Can Pixar simply not make original movies anymore? While a great deal has been made of Pixar's failings of late, a lot of it is blown out of proportion. Of the two original stories released before Elio, but after theaters were open again, one movie struggled, but the other was a solid success. While Elemental had a rough opening weekend, the second worst in Pixar history at the time, between having solid legs domestically and being a solid win overseas, it was actually reasonably successful. It's still possible Elio could end up doing much better than its opening has suggested, as Elemental did. Lightyear, which barely made back its $200 million budget, has to be seen as a disappointment, but considering that movie at least had a popular character to trade on, there's an argument it was more of a 'franchise' movie than an original one, even if it wasn't a Toy Story movie. The truth is that while Pixar absolutely is having a hard time launching non-franchise material, as is basically every other studio. There's a reason everybody made a big deal of Ryan Coogler's Sinners becoming a box office champ despite its lack of franchise connection. Few original movies, of any kind, have done that well in a very long time. Once upon a time, simply being a Pixar movie may have been enough to draw an audience to the theater, but that's clearly not the case anymore. Now, audiences are in the same place with Pixar as they are with most other studios. They'll put their trust in franchises more easily than original content, because those franchises are known and trusted. That doesn't mean there isn't some cause for concern. A broadly successful, crowd-pleasing original story is absolutely something Pixar needs to produce, and sooner rather than later, if at all possible. The studio still needs the occasional original hit, if for no other reason than to create new franchises for the future. Many people thought the Toy Story movies should have ended with the third, and while Toy Story 4 was still wildly successful, and Toy Story 5 likely will be, there is absolutely a point at which franchises go on too long, and must be replaced by something new. Of course, there's no magic formula for creating brand-new hit movies. If anybody could do it, it would happen all the time. Pixar's track record, on the whole, is better than most. Whether something like Hoppers or the recently announced Gatto is the story we've been waiting for, only time will tell. Until then, we'll always have Coco 2.


Cosmopolitan
an hour ago
- Cosmopolitan
Lauren Sánchez Bezos's net worth decoded after lavish wedding to Jeff Bezos in Venice
It was quite the spectacle – but of course, we wouldn't expect anything less from a wedding featuring one of the richest people in the world. The glitterati, super wealthy and power players all descended on Venice for Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez's (now Sánchez Bezos) wedding, with the controversial three-day extravaganza on the receiving end of criticism from locals and activists calling out 'over-tourism' in an increasingly delicate ecosystem and accusations levelled at Amazon over the amount (or lack) of corporation tax the company pays. Despite the naysayers and critics (who also were scathing about the sheer level of wealth needed to effectively hire a city at your disposal), Bezos and Sánchez married in an 'intimate' ceremony with just 200 guests at the San Giorgio Maggiore Basilica church on one of Venice's nearby islands. The ceremony was just one of many events (with a pre-wedding foam party on a super yacht and a 'dolce notte' sleepover also parts of the nuptial extravaganza). But now the pair have officially tied the knot, it left us wondering what space-travelling, book-writing former news anchor Sanchez's net worth might be – both before and after her big day? After all, she had a successful career in her own right before meeting Bezos – so we dug a little deeper to find out more… A formidable power player in her own right, Sánchez, 55, has been an established journalist in California since the 1990s. As well as working as a news anchor (which saw her land a bit-part in 1999 cult classic Fight Club), Sánchez was the original host of FOX's popular dancing competition So You Think You Can Dance (she left after just one season to have her first child and went on to be replaced by Cat Deeley). Alongside her onscreen career, in 2016, Sánchez earned a pilot license, which then led to the formation of her production company, Black Ops Aviation – an endeavour which allows her to fly planes and helicopters for television programmes and films that may require one. She even served as a consultant on Christopher Nolan's Oscar-winning 2017 film, Dunkirk. 'We came from nothing,' she told The Hollywood Reporter about the venture back in 2017. 'I used to sleep in the back of my grandmother's car when she would clean houses, and I've been fortunate enough to have a career. 'Working is part of my DNA. I enjoy it, and now I want to give back.' Her brother, Michael, however disputes this version of their upbringing and economic background, telling The Times 'Our parents were successful and wealthy,' and that their grandmother owned a restaurant and a race horse. In addition to this, Sánchez has also written her own children's book, based on her experience with school and dyslexia. The Fly Who Flew to Space is a story about a fly named Flynn, who struggles academically but somehow ends up in the cockpit of a rocket. Upon its release in 2024, it debuted at the top of the New York Times Bestsellers list, and likely contributed to her significant net worth (pop culture fans may also remember that Sánchez was one of the many celebrity passengers on the Blue Origin's New Shephard programme earlier this year). We also have to point towards Sánchez's first marriage; having wed Hollywood agent and founding partner of Endeavor talent agency Patrick Whitesell in 2005, the pair divorced in 2019 after she met Bezos. TMZ reports the pair had a prenup, with Whitesell thought to be worth $100 million (around £72 million) at the time. With these numerous avenues of income, multiple sources have suggested that Sánchez's net worth before the marriage to Bezos was around $30 million (£21 million) – not too shabby at all. While there has been no official word on whether the pair have decided to hash out a financial agreement before the lavish big day, with Bezos thought to be worth a staggering $237 billion (£194 billion), it's likely there would have been something put in place. Bezos famously did not have a prenup with his ex, philanthropist Mackenzie Scott. The pair, who were married for 25 years, got divorced in 2019 – with Scott receiving a 25% stake in Amazon (believed to translate into around $35 billion, or £29.9 million). Scott vowed to give away most of her wealth, and has since parted ways with She has given away more than $19 billion (£13.7 billion) in donations to charitable causes though her Yield Foundation. Naturally, there is no official number out there, but a ceremony this big and this grand is a multi-million dollar affair (after all, with Lady Gaga and Elton John reportedly performing, it was hardly going to be a cut-price do). Venice regional governor Luca Zaia originally estimated the cost between €20 million-€30 million, (£17 million to £25 million) in an article published by Reuters. After a last-minute venue change because of security concerns and risk of protests, this estimate later jumped to €40 million-€48 million (£34 million to £41 million). Kimberley Bond is a Multiplatform Writer for Harper's Bazaar, focusing on the arts, culture, careers and lifestyle. She previously worked as a Features Writer for Cosmopolitan UK, and has bylines at The Telegraph, The Independent and British Vogue among countless others.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Vin Diesel shows off new physique at star-studded charity event
Vin Diesel has been photographed looking noticeably less buff while posing with some of his celebrity pals. Diesel, best known for his role in the Fast and Furious franchise, flashed a smile as he hugged his former co-star, Charlize Theron while attending her Africa Outreach Project event in Los Angeles at the weekend. Advertisement Wearing a black vest top and dark sunglasses, Diesel showed off a larger frame as he enjoyed the event with his famous pals. 3 Diesel, best known for his role in the Fast and Furious franchise, flashed a smile as he hugged his former co-star, Charlize Theron while attending her Africa Outreach Project event in Los Angeles at the weekend. Getty Images for CTAOP 3 Vin Diesel has been photographed looking noticeably less buff while posing with some of his celebrity pals. Getty Images for CTAOP His latest public appearance comes after a fellow actor took a stab at Diesel during an interview earlier this year. Advertisement Actor Paul Walter Hauser launched a surprising spray on Vin Diesel in a recent interview, recoiling when the interviewer jokingly compared him to the action star. Recent Golden Globe winner Hauser was sitting down with outlet CinemaBlend in a press junket for his latest film, Inside Out 2, in which he voices the character 'Embarrassment.' 3 His latest public appearance comes after a fellow actor took a stab at Diesel during an interview earlier this year. Universal/Courtesy Everett Collection Advertisement But he had no embarrassment hitting back when the interviewer joked to Hauser that his character's arc in the animated film means 'you're like Vin Diesel now.' 'Please don't say that,' he shot back, explaining: 'I like to think I am on time and approachable.' Hauser's Inside Out 2 co-star Lewis Black reacted with shock as he explained his surprise diss.