FromStar WarstoGame of Thrones, successful franchises lately seem to be focusing on releasing prequels for existing characters. In particular, theStar Warsfranchise has spent its entirety exploring the events either leading up to or in the aftermath of Anakin Skywalker becoming Darth Vader. Similarly, theHarry Potterfranchise used theFantastic Beaststrilogy to explore Albus Dumbledore’s past —to fans' disappointment, for that matter. That said, some redemption may come in the upcomingGame of Thronesprequel series,House of the Dragon,as the franchise relies on a beloved book franchise. Yet the elephant in the room remains: prequels often fall short of expectations.
Typically, fans feel the most devastating blows when studios choose to make prequels. In some cases, prequels even unwrite certain characters by adding plot holes to their arc rather than filling in the blanks. Prequels have a chance to be great, but often under-deliver on storylines and character backstories. Additionally, prequels are an easy way for studios to make more money rather than exploring the remarkable landscape they created with the franchise. While prequels are typically underwhelming and undermining to fans, one franchise stands alone as having a remarkable prequel. Here’s our case against prequels, specifically in that the gaps are the most creative space for fans.
Fantastic Fan Theories and Art
One of the most compelling cases against prequels lies in the reason these franchises are so popular in the first place: the fans. One group of fans to receive credit for their extensive fan theories were fans of the BBC’s hit seriesSherlock, starringBenedict Cumberbatchas Sherlock Holmes. The show’s writers, Stephan Moffatt and Mark Gatiss, acknowledged the power of fan theories in Season 3, according toIGN: “The fandemonium surrounding Sherlock and speculation about his death in the show seemed to reflect rampant real-world audience conjecture about how the fictional detective may have faked his own death at the conclusion of Season 2”. Considering how creative fans can be with their theories, it’s puzzling as to why studios ignore their fanbase when writing prequels. In the case ofSherlock, fan theories were truly beneficial to the continuing story. For a prequel, using fan theories could be just as beneficial. Yet, as is often the case, like withFantastic Beastsfor instance, prequels can often undo fans' adoration for a franchise because…
Related:Fantastic Beasts: Should The Secrets of Dumbledore Be the Final Movie in the Franchise?
Some Things are Better Left Unsaid
Another compelling case against prequels is that some characters often become unwritten. The more a story grows, the more pathways characters can take. Essentially a franchise is like Pandora’s box. The good of a franchise is seeing how the story develops and how characters change. As a result, the negativity of a franchise releasing prequels is that long-beloved characters run the risk of being wrought with loopholes. With the massive success ofHarry Potter, theFantastical Beasts and Where to Find Themprequel saga had the potential to give more of a backstory to Albus Dumbledore and, more generally, expand the wizarding world that had come to define an entier generation of book- and movie-lovers. Instead of creating a new story line that connected to the Dumbledore fans knew in theHarry Potterfilms, the same narrative was repeated.
Ignored Terrain
Every story that has been and will be told remains compelling for the simple reason that the characters and the lands brought to life are worthy of exploration. In theSex and the Cityprequel series,The Carrie Diaries, Carrie, portrayed by AnnaSophia Robb, is in high school and is beginning to date. The series explores Carrie’s first big love: Sebastian Kydd,portrayed by Austin Butler. By the time the prequel series was released, the original series had been off the air and two films had been released. The possibilities of a prequel often trap one character in a city or land already familiar to audiences. Imagine teenage Carrie Bradshaw roaming the streets of Los Angeles, only to bump into someone, so fashion forward, she decides to go to New York City.
Related:How the Star Wars Prequels Went From Being Hated to Loved
The Only Exception
Despite the many reasons a prequel doesn’t always work, one saga’s prequel is quite the exception. Director Peter Jackson had extraordinary success with theLord of the Ringstrilogy despite studios like Disney not jumping at the opportunity to make fantasy films, according toPaste Magazine. By signing on to direct the prequel saga,The Hobbit, it only meant one thing forLord of the Ringsfans: an epic tale about Bilbo Baggins, portrayed by Martin Freeman. The main reasonThe Hobbitis an extraordinary sequel is it’s based on a book, likeThe Lord of the Rings. Yet, the difference between the prequel and the main story in this case is the studio could draw inspiration from one book instead of one massive book broken up into three separate books.
