I think at the point, we should just accept that the first film in a given franchise is just an extended preview for the sequel.

Sounds more like a serial than a sequel

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it writing assignments that pay the small bucks, and specs that result in big bucks?

Weren't two Lord of the Rings sequels developed before the first one was even made?

Also, I don't think developing a sequel before the film is released sends a message of any kind to audiences. Let's keep in mind that the vast majority of moviegoers are entirely unaware of what projects are being developed. Ardent movie buffs will know, but I doubt it would affect their ticket-buying decision at all.

@TSW -

Lord of the Rings is a bad example. The entire trilogy was available in book form for almost 50 years. The last time they tried adapting it to film without committing to do the entire thing right, front-to-back, we got the imaginative but ultimately failed Ralph Bakshi animated version.

The only way LOTR was going to get enough fan buy-in during the internet era was to commit to filming it as though it were a single large movie. That is essentially what ended up being done.

A totally different story than seeing media pieces last December 19th that Avatar already has a sequel in development. What if Avatar had turned out to be the next Waterworld instead of the next Titanic?