• lugal@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes, the “second war to end all wars” and the “cold war that only gets hot in the periphery”

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 month ago

      Nukes are about the only reason we haven’t made it a trilogy.

      It’ll be the last one in the franchise if they do.

    • devfuuu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      Typical holywood and their sequels. Just pray they don’t remember to retrofit a prequel in there.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      WWII wasn’t even really a sequel - it’s more of a classic reboot. It’s almost exactly the same story as the first one, just with a few twists like Japan and the atomic bomb ending thrown in.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I think you’re underplaying the sequel aspects. Russia was one of the antagonists in the first installment, began as an antagonist in the second, but flipped to protagonist ally in the first act. Also in the first installment the Ottoman Empire was an antagonist ally, where Turkey was neutral through all of WWII. Finally, China was an ally in WWII and huge victim of the Japanese , but underwent a revolution joining with Russia to become the primary antagonists in the third installment “Cold War”.