How Many Instalments in a Franchise is Too Many?

Our mission at SAW is to foster conversations about this thing we all love (or love to hate): film/TV. Many of our features are designed with you in mind. Your opinions, to be more to the point. You have ’em. We want to hear ’em.

Question of the Day (QOTD) is exactly what it sounds like. It’s a film/TV-related question that we put to you, the reader. The comments section below is like the feedback box at work; except, in this example, we actually read what you write and care about what you have to say.

A couple days ago in the SAW digital offices, I was chatting with Sailor about the Puppet Master franchise given he had just watched some of them in the last month. I ended up googling the series and, to my astonishment, saw that there were fifteen films in the horror franchise. Sailor said he stopped watching the series because the films progressively got worse, which made me ask today’s question: how many instalments in a franchise is one too many?

Sailor said that as long as the films are good, he doesn’t care how many instalments a series has. I countered by saying that a film series would have to have a good reason to go past 10 films.

Granted, let’s set some rules down. We’re talking about franchises that focus on one character (so no Marvel Cinematic Universes in this equation). With that said, although James Bond has 20+ films, the fact that they shift up the cast and tone every decade or so makes it easy for people to jump in at any point.

But for films that have one overarching story over multiple films, when is it too much? I’ll agree with Sailor that quality definitely plays a factor, but is there a point where even if the film is good it is just too much?

So what about you, folks? At what number (if it exists) should a film series end?

I’ll see you in the trenches.

Author: Marmaduke Karlston

"Wait a minute. Wait a minute Doc, uh, are you telling me you built a time machine... out of a DeLorean?"