I hate the number 2. Or 3 or 4 or 5 (if the number is any higher what are you even doing) for that matter. Specifically, I hate them on film posters.

The default title for a sequel is simply slapping a 2 on the end of the original title and calling it a day. To me, this indicates a rerun, a repeat, a lazy lap around the track again (as, unfortunately, is so often the case), not a continuation of story. Even where sequels simply delineate themselves with a Part 2 or Chapter 2 it makes the second film feel like something more intentional, an extension not an afterthought. This is obviously a question of art vs commerce, or an indication of cinema’s position in the cultural landscape and studios’ trust in an audience’s awareness and intelligence. Of course, I am in favour of a decision that gets films seen by more people, but a title is important. It says something about a film, it is your first impression and, for me, a repetitive sequel title gets us off on the wrong foot.

Whilst, yes, this is literally getting down to semantics, when a sequel title is more creative, it makes it feel like the film has more of a reason to exist beyond being a cash in. It indicates some thought has gone into it and makes the film feel worthy of having its own title, like it will stand on its own two feet and not simply be riding the coattails of its predecessor. It tells us something about the film and separates it just enough that in some way may help with comparisons. The notion of thought is especially true when the obvious title is right there. See Now You See Me slapping the 2 on its second film, waiting until the third to finally go for the obvious Now You See Me: Now You Don’t. (Apparently, the filmmakers had wanted that for the second film but there was some bizarre marketing testing that said the word ‘don’t’ would stop people from seeing the film…) The new Ready or Not film almost got it right but had to shove that 2 in the middle to become Ready or Not 2 Here I come. I get the apparent laborious need to emphasise the fact it is a sequel in our fragmented, algorithmic age where even successful films don’t always permeate the zeitgeist in the way they used to but again it implies a recycling of a previous story.

This can also be seen in the way Rian Johnson’s Benoit Blanc series is branded; the detectives of the past, such as Poirot, were (and are) given enough credit that each film is allowed to simply be called by its name. Not so for poor Benoit; every film since the first, Knives Out, comes with the subtitle A Knives Out Mystery which honestly that makes no sense beyond brand recognition. If there needed to be a tagline tying the films together, surely it should be A Benoit Blanc Mystery. The fact that Daniel Craig’s glorious detective apparently doesn’t have that level of name recognition is a travesty to me; I stand by my opinion that he will go down an icon, second only in Craig’s repertoire to James Bond. Each story in the series is completely separate; he is the only link so it makes no sense to call Wake Up Dead Man a continuation of Knives Out. Perhaps this is also due to the streaming issue (*resists urge to go on a diatribe about the tragedy of the series being bought by Netflix*), in attempt to make sure the films don’t get buried as too many great ones do. Perhaps it is an indication of cinema’s unfortunately less-central place in our wider culture where some audiences have no idea of a new film’s release until its little poster lands in the Recently Added carousel on their device.

Sometimes films find a way to weave the title together with the story itself; take the Ocean’s franchise, for example, the number relating to the number of people in the crew. Whilst clearly this means that characters are added or removed so the numbers can increase incrementally, the title tells you something about the film. 22 Jump Street, one of the best send ups of all things sequel, played on the concept brilliantly, by forcing its protagonists to move to the address across the street, purely to make the title work.

Now, what instigated this, alongside the recent release of Ready or Not 2 Here I Come was really The Devil Wears Prada 2. I’m already very wary of this film (the original is potentially my most-watched film of all time) and keeping my fingers crossed that it is more than a money-maker and can stand by the original (the trailers haven’t given me much hope and really who can capture lightning in a bottle twice), but the 2 feels lazy. It doesn’t say anything. Even the fan suggestion of The Devil Still Wears Prada, whilst not amazing, tells us something. Like I said before, a 2 feels like a repetition, without saying anything new it implies the same story in some sense…in which case, why the sequel? At least the pitchfork-stiletto iconography from the first film is so strong we can have posters with simply two shoes than a giant 2 stuck over the title.

Yes, this is probably nitpicking to the nth degree and I won’t argue against that, but in the sanctity of cinema, a title can mean so much. On a final note, think of the greatest (or even just really good) sequels ever made…how many of them simply slapped a 2 on the original’s title? Whilst I’m not saying this necessarily had a huge impact, can you imagine their alternative titles really holding up in the pantheon of prestige?

Aliens, The Empire Strikes Back, The Godfather Part II (yes a 2 but the Part is doing a lot of heavy lifting, alongside the roman numerals), The Dark Knight, T2: Judgement Day, even Top Gun: Maverick

…a little creativity goes a long way.