Someone thought that it would be a good idea to do a Spring Breakers sequel? Really? Out of the hundreds of thousands of scripts being sent around Hollywood that could have been put into development, somewhere out there, a real life human being (supposedly with a brain), decided what audiences are pining for is sequel to Harmony Korine's brain-fuck of a film.
Artist integrity? What the hell is that? We all know this is about money. Money, money, money. Spring Breakers didn't fair too well critically, but it has spawned a cult fan base and made over $30 million in box office takings. If you're not a brooding Ryan Gosling beating the shit out of people in a scorpion jacket, you won't come close to that sum as an independent release.
"What are they doing? They can't make a Spring Breakers sequel!" seems to be the anthem of supporters of the original film and those who are picketing against the mere idea of Spring Breakers: The Second Coming. Can't we focus on how great a name it is for a porn parody rather than crying out in such horror that this film is happening?
James Franco, who played the Riff-Raff inspired drug dealer Alien, had his say. You know Franco isn't playing around when he uses capitals in the right places on Instagram.
I can get on board with Franco's reasoning. It is a horrible thought and is made far worse by the fact the same production company behind the original are going ahead with the project. Spring Breakers is more than keg soaked titties and chicks snorting lines of coke off each other and it shows in the irony of a sequel being made. Did any of the producers even watch the film?
The internet collectively losing their minds is a continuous draining cycle when it comes to news like this. Why are we stressing over something that happens all the time in the film industry?
Mainstream and independent cinema are both guilty of lacking in originality. Because of the monetary backing that blockbusters have, we are subjected more to whatever Tom Cruise vehicle needs promoting than an English-language adaptation of a European film. Independent films don't have money, but they can sure churn out low-budget and shoddy b-movies that no one will ever see unless they're looking on Amazon Prime Instant Video.
Spring Breakers isn't an anomaly to get the sequel treatment from a smallish independent offering either. Remember American Psycho II: All American Girl? Though I'm sure it provided some fairly decent wanking material for Mila Kunis fans, it was a follow-up to a successful box office adaptation of a cult film - again, the original ironically by the same production company responsible for Spring Breakers - that didn't favour well in anyone's eyes (apart from the jizzing part). The name was a dead giveaway that it wasn't going to be on par with American Psycho, but why does it matter? Dudes jacked off to Mila; some laughs were had. Apart from the fact that the film industry is eating our souls away on all levels what's wrong with a terrible sequel?
There isn't a problem in knowing that Spring Breakers: The Second Coming exists. The film is being shopped around in Cannes (but seriously, what does that mean these days?) so we know that it is a real thing. We have a decision here - either watch, or don't. All of us may get lucky and find it as a straight-to-DVD bargain release.
Even if it does score a good distribution company and makes its way to our cinema screens, so what? Sure, it will be publicised in some places, and people will be talking about it. You just have to make the active choice to not go and support it and it'll burn in the fiery ashes of shitty movie hell. Then we can all move on.
The one thing that this issue will always fall back on is the state of the original. Will its good name - if it has one - be tarnished forever after a botch job on a follow-up movie? Only a few beloved franchises survive the cut-throat world of sequel criticism, so what will the fate of Spring Breakers be?
Regardless of the quality of Spring Breakers: The Second Coming, the original will remain unscathed and intact. It'll be just as important for modern cinema as it was on its release date, and above all, will remain a defining film for this generation, sequel or no-sequel.