Sequels

I'm in the thick of revising KILLER EYES right now. It's the sequel to KILLER OF KILLERS. A lot of stories have sequels. Not every story. Some should have sequels. Some even need sequels. Some don't need sequels but have one or more anyway.

Killer of Killers has a sequel, but it's really a continuation of the same story. So I'm not even sure it's a sequel. It's more like part two. I think if the book is about the same characters in the same universe, but it's a different story, then it's a sequel. Well, it's all semantics, I suppose. Killer Eyes, the sequel, is the conclusion to the story that begins in Killer of Killers. Of course, there's a different plot, and new villains, (actually, a lot of new villains.)

Now if I choose to write another story about Trent Smith, and I might just do that, then it will be a sequel, because I wrap up the Killer of Killers story in Killer Eyes. So it would have to be a completely different story if I write a third book in that series.

Now THE VASE is a story that needs no sequel. Nor does it need a part two. That story is complete as is. Now could I write a sequel to THE VASE? I think I could. I could use some of those characters, maybe all of them, and make another story.

I suppose any story could be continued in a sequel, or a sequel could be made from any story. But some shouldn't. For example, I remember that TV movie called Night Stalker. It was about some reporter who tracked down a modern-age vampire. It was well-done and so they made it into a TV series. Not only did it not warrant a TV series, (which flopped,) it didn't even warrant a sequel. Because what made that first show good was the Vampire, not the reporter, and the series followed the reporter, (since the vampire was killed and eliminated from the story.) But without that vampire, (and the actor who played it,) there was no more interest in that story. I'm sure there are many other examples.