Splitting Sequels...

I find it somewhat distressing, this recent trend of film adaptations of books being split up into multiple parts. First there was Harry Potter: All the other books, they just cut subplots out left and right in order to fit everything into the allotted 2 1/2 hour time frame. But the final book... They decided there was just so much stuff, they couldn't possibly cut it, or fit it all into one movie, so we got Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: part 1, and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: part 2.

Then along came Twilight, announcing that, wouldn't you know it? The final book of THEIR series is just too big and grandiose to fit into one movie too! So they released The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - part 1, and The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - part 2.

After that was The Hobbit. Peter Jackson said right from the beginning that he planned to split the film up into two parts. But then, all of a sudden, not long before part 1 was released, he announced that, try though he might, he just couldn't cut this epic saga down to two films, so he would have to make it into three. It didn't matter that Mr. Jackson previously managed to fit each book in the Lord of the Rings trilogy into just ONE movie apiece, even though they're all longer than The Hobbit. The Hobbit is different, and requires a trilogy all its own.

And now, I've just been on IMDb and discovered another addition to this ever-growing trend. Mockingjay, the third book in the Hunger Games trilogy, is going to be split into two parts as well. They haven't even begun pre-production yet, and they already know they need more time for this book than one movie will allow. Even though one movie is fine for the first and second books, it won't do for the third.

What distresses me about this trend is not the blatant Hollywood Greed that it demonstrates, wanting to squeeze that extra bit of profit out of their series. I'm in marketing, so I understand the compulsion. If it's something I want to see badly enough, I'll gladly pay for it again. If not, then I won't even pay for it once, so what does it matter to me?

No, what irks me about it is that there's no room for this kind of doubling up on the book end of things. If I write a trilogy of books, Hollywood can sell at least four movies from it. But I only get to sell three books! If I want to sell a fourth book, I have to start from scratch and write another book! Which Hollywood can then turn into two more movies! Where's the justice in that?

Fortunately, I've come up with a solution. I'm going to start work on a new Young Adult trilogy. I'm going to call it Sequel Splitters. The individual books won't have titles, because by the time they get to the film stage, they'll all be called by the name of the first book anyway. New Moon and Breaking Dawn are still the Twilight Saga. Catching Fire and Mockingjay are just the Hunger Games books. Heck, I'm a big Harry Potter fan, and even I just refer to them most of the time as "the fourth Harry Potter book, the fifth Harry Potter book," etc. So why come up with extra titles if no one's going to use them?

No, the first book is just going to be called "Sequel Splitters: Part 1." The second will be "Sequel Splitters: Part 2." Then the third book I'm going to cut in half and release the two halves a few months apart. "Sequel Splitters: Part 3 - Part 1" and "Sequel Splitters: Part 3 - Part 2."

Then, when Hollywood gets around to adapting them, they can split BOTH final books into two movies. "Sequel Splitters: Part 3 - Part 1, Part 1," and so on. They may decide to throw in a Roman numeral or a "The Final Chapter" or something, to keep things from getting too convoluted, but I rather hope not.

But whatever they decide to call them, the result is the same: Four books and six movies out of one trilogy. Publishers and producers alike will be practically when I try to sell them on this. It can't fail! We'll all be rich! I just need to...


Wait, what's that? Plot? Characters? Actual words written on the page? Spoilsports.