I don’t think he’s saying what should or should not be made, so much as his personal interest. For him, after the latter comes out, he probably wouldn’t see the inevitable sequel. Why, for him? Probably going to be fairly similar as the last one, and as a filmmaker, especially one who has been around as long as him, it gets dry after awhile as you see formulas recycled again and again (among some potential moral quandries). Now, does that mean he’s saying, “Ban sequels! This movie shouldn’t be sequeled and no one should see it!” No, of course not. He simply doesn’t see it as his cup of tea.

Honestly seems like a strange article. Really doesn’t seem like it holds too much weight or state, fairly benign (sorry, love ya Playlist overlords, long time caller first time listener). I think that last paragraph might be a bit of a stretch, that Schrader is interested in “progress” simply due to the examples he gave, the ones logical and relevant. Personally I don’t find it a stretch to imagine him in line to see the first white nationalist superhero $200 million movie (“The White Power”?), because by his words he chose, that too hasn’t been made (let’s pray that never exists). Kind of an extreme example, but let’s not conflate looking for newness with progress.