Post by BATouttaheck on Mar 10, 2019 19:28:40 GMT
geode
Personally I don't think a set of only two movies is ever a "franchise" even if they consist of an original film and a sequel with a different story, it really takes more entries. For instance I don't think "Funny Girl" and "Funny Lady" or "Love Story" and "Oliver's Story" constitute franchises.
Personally I don't think a set of only two movies is ever a "franchise" even if they consist of an original film and a sequel with a different story, it really takes more entries. For instance I don't think "Funny Girl" and "Funny Lady" or "Love Story" and "Oliver's Story" constitute franchises.
NOR does anyone else I have EVER encountered. This seems to be a thought pattern of only one person on the planet who has refused in several threads to accept any view but his own on the matter.
He has called films that were made in the silent era and then made and remade several times "franchises".
Ex: The Three Musketeers, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Robin Hood … all to the OP are "franchises" …
