The Sequel Paradox: Research Shows Why Less Innovation Sells More Movie Tickets at First
Movie sequels often get a bad reputation. Many people assume studios simply recycle the same ideas because it’s easy money, while critics complain about declining quality and creative exhaustion. But recent academic research suggests that sequel-making is far more calculated than it appears on the surface. According to studies discussed by Binghamton University School of Management professor Subimal Chatterjee, sequels follow a surprisingly strategic pattern—one that explains why familiar stories sell more tickets early on, even as creativity gradually becomes necessary later.
This idea, often referred to as the “sequel paradox,” explores how movie franchises balance familiarity, innovation, audience expectations, and financial risk. The findings come from two major academic studies published in the Journal of Marketing and the Journal of Business Research, both of which analyze how sequels perform commercially and critically over time.
At its core, the research shows that less innovation helps early sequels succeed, but that same strategy becomes less effective as franchises grow longer.
Why the First Sequel Plays It Safe
One of the clearest findings from the research is that the first sequel is usually designed to feel very familiar. Studios intentionally stick close to the original film’s formula—the same tone, characters, themes, and structure—because audiences already know and like it.
This approach is not accidental. According to Chatterjee’s research, studios aim to release the first sequel as quickly as possible after the original film becomes popular. The idea is to capitalize on peak audience excitement while the story and characters are still fresh in people’s minds. In simple terms, studios want to strike while the iron is hot.
By minimizing creative risk and offering audiences something recognizable, first sequels often outperform the original movie at the box office. Viewers feel comfortable spending money on a story they believe they already understand, and familiarity reduces uncertainty about whether the movie will be enjoyable.
Timing Is a Crucial Part of Sequel Strategy
Another major factor highlighted in the research is release timing. Successful franchises tend to release sequels relatively fast, especially in their early stages. Long gaps between films can weaken momentum and reduce audience interest, even if the original movie was highly successful.
The study published in the Journal of Business Research shows that fast and frequent sequels generally earn more money, particularly at the beginning of a franchise. However, this strategy has limits. While speed helps early on, it does not guarantee long-term success as the number of sequels increases.
When Familiarity Turns Into Boredom
As franchises move beyond the second film, something interesting happens. By the time a series reaches its third, fourth, or fifth installment, audiences begin to experience boredom. At this point, repeating the same formula becomes less effective.
Chatterjee’s research shows that filmmakers and studios respond by increasing innovation in later sequels. This might include introducing new characters, shifting genres, experimenting with tone, or dramatically changing the story direction. These changes are meant to refresh audience interest and prevent fatigue.
However, this increased innovation comes with a downside. While later sequels may still perform well compared to standalone movies, their revenues tend to decline faster than earlier entries in the franchise. Innovation can attract curiosity, but it also introduces risk—especially if changes clash with what fans expect from the series.
The Sequel Paradox Explained
This leads to one of the most surprising conclusions of the research: sequels often earn more money but receive worse reviews. This is the heart of the sequel paradox.
Box office data shows that sequels frequently outperform their original films, particularly in the early stages of a franchise. At the same time, critics consistently rate sequels lower than the movies that started the series. Even when sequels make more money, they are often seen as less original, less artistic, or less meaningful.
This disconnect highlights a key tension in the film industry. Audience behavior and critical standards do not always align. Many viewers prioritize entertainment, familiarity, and emotional comfort, while critics tend to value originality, innovation, and artistic risk.
Why More Sequels Can Still Help a Franchise
Interestingly, the research also finds that having multiple sequels can actually benefit future releases. Each additional sequel serves as a signal to audiences that the franchise must be doing something right. After all, studios would not continue investing millions of dollars if people were not showing up.
This phenomenon creates a form of perceived quality through repetition. Even if individual sequels earn mixed reviews, the sheer existence of multiple installments reassures audiences that the franchise is popular and worth their time.
The Innovation, Comfort, and Stimulation Framework
The 2015 Journal of Marketing study introduces a framework that helps explain consumer responses to sequels. It focuses on three key elements:
- Comfort, which comes from familiarity and repetition
- Stimulation, which comes from novelty and surprise
- Relative innovation, which measures how different a sequel feels compared to previous films
Early sequels emphasize comfort, while later sequels increase stimulation through innovation. The challenge for studios is finding the right balance between these forces at each stage of a franchise.
How This Research Applies Beyond Movies
Although the studies focus on movies, the findings have broader implications. The same patterns can be seen in TV series, video game franchises, product launches, and even smartphone models. Consumers often prefer small, familiar improvements early on and become more receptive to bold changes only after repetition sets in.
This helps explain why companies across industries release iterative upgrades before making major redesigns. Familiarity builds trust, while innovation becomes necessary only after audiences start losing interest.
What This Means for Hollywood Today
The sequel paradox shows that sequel-heavy Hollywood is not simply running out of ideas. Instead, studios are responding rationally to consumer behavior. Early familiarity maximizes profits, while later innovation helps extend a franchise’s lifespan.
It also explains why complaints about sequel fatigue coexist with strong box office numbers. People may criticize sequels, but they still buy tickets—especially when they know what they’re getting.
In the end, the research reveals that sequels are not just about repetition. They are about managing expectations, minimizing risk, and timing change carefully. Creativity is not absent—it is simply deployed strategically.
Research References
Innovation Sequences over Iterated Offerings: A Relative Innovation, Comfort, and Stimulation Framework of Consumer Responses – Journal of Marketing (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.10.0413
Fast and Frequent: Investigating Box Office Revenues of Motion Picture Sequels – Journal of Business Research (2008)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.07.030
