How can something with 'Last' in the title have a sequel? - The Last Exorcism Part II (2013) Discussion

[–] quasimodem2 11 years ago

So the first film in the series should've been called The Second...? Even more confusing!

Friday the 13th did it twice, The Final Chapter and The Final Friday - neither of which was actually the final anything. Don't trust horror in this regard. Horror will lie right to your face.

--
"No one has the right to an opinion founded on ignorance" -Harlan Ellison

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] alucard0617 11 years ago

It may seem like a cop out, but the implication of the title is that this is merely the second part of the Last Exorcism. Two-Part movies of the same story are a big hype these days so I guess there's no reason why this movie can't do it as well. I wouldn't be surprised in there's one more part after this to finish off the story in an acutely symmetrical package. Having "Part" in the title makes it seem like the movie is simply an entry in the same story and not a completely different story in the same universe (like Friday the 13th is notorious for). Last Exorcism may also just be referring to a plot element, such as exorcising this girl once and for all, and is not an actual implication that it's the final entry in the series.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GeneticSugarKane 11 years ago

So whose last exorcism is it in this one?

One Life to Leave ~ My lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists

reply

[–] kurt-2000 11 years ago

Not really sure that it matters.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bababear 11 years ago

The "original" THE LAST EXORCISM cost $2 million to make. It grossed $40 million in theaters. To simplify it, for each $1 invested in it the film made $20, and that's not including foreign release, DVD, pay per view, cable, and eventual sale to broadcast TV.

Is there anyone out there seriously surprised to see a sequel?

reply

[–] semsox 11 years ago

"So whose last exorcism is it in this one?" I'd say based upon critics and box office performance, It'll be the producer and directors "Last Exorcism".

reply

[–] GeneticSugarKane 11 years ago

Nice one.

One Life to Leave ~ My lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists

reply

[–] Rat_27 11 years ago

What about the Never-Ending Story? ... Part II or III?

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kushkandi 11 years ago

Exactly! A lot of horror movies do that... Crap movies of the horror genre should be called, Cheap Thrills 1, Cheap Thrills 2, Cheap Thrills 3, etc... I remember when I was in High School, I saw the original 'Scary Movie' in theatres. I remember looking at the movie poster, in which the tagline read, "No Mercy. No Shame. No Sequels." Since then, the Scary Movie franchise has released at least 5 sequels.

reply

[–] eric20other2002 11 years ago

The first film was "The Last Exorcism" remember the priest never made it out alive, so it really was his last. I do think they made an error by calling this The Last Exorcism Part 2, as they should have called it something else, but they may have feared no one would realize it was connected to the last film.

reply

[–] BigguBossu 11 years ago

Watch the first one, then you'll know.

reply

[–] danielvdell 11 years ago

I'm taking it to mean that two movies are using two different definitions of the word "last." The first movie's title refers to the final exorcism that Cotton Marcus will perform. Meanwhile, "last" in Part II's title refers back to that exorcism -- the previous exorcism... the last exorcism.

I could be wrong, but it makes sense to me. Also, since they opted to call this "Part II" rather than "The Last Exorcism 2," any arguments over why it has "last" in the title could be moot simply because it's marketed as the second part or continuation of the first film's story.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Apawk 11 years ago

Final Destination had 5 films.
The word Final or Last could be drawn out in a series of films if it's CONTINUOUS.

reply

[–] jpm2875 11 years ago

The title for The Haunting in Connecticut 2 is the WORST title ever...whoever named it that should just stop period end of story.

reply

[–] gmoneymcdaniel66 11 years ago

It's because the first film was that particular priests' last exorcism before he died. This is called The Last Exorcism part II because of name recognition.

Dirty Harry: Go ahead..... Make my day.

reply

[–] bludgeon565 11 years ago

I have some new information on this. I read the title of the first movie was truncated for the American market.

The original title was "The Last Exorcism This Week"

reply

[–] schizophonicguy 11 years ago

Why does everyone ask this question! Ok let's explain from the beginning.

(1) When they made the first film they did not have the intention of making a sequel.

(2) 'The Last Exorcism' is because the story is the preachers story not Nell's. So really the title is accurate.

(3) What would you call this film? It's a direct sequel from the first film it's not like you could change the title. How would people know it's a sequel. It's relevant and pivotal you see the first film before seeing this one.

Many horror films have titles such as 'The Final Cut' Freddy's Dead' 'The Final Chapter etc etc (believe me the list goes on and on) They still need the original title in the name so people know they're a sequel in a franchise.

reply

[–] smithgdwg-164-181238 11 years ago

Who cares, the movie sucks donkey balls.

reply