Akshay continues on his path of ignorance in a bid to make his opinion seem important and educated.  I will attempt to answer his comments by addressing each component of his argument.

He argues that there is a degree of plausibility to "National Treasure:  Book of Secrets" with regards to Nicholas Cage kidnapping The President of the United States [of America].  Wait a second, he's taking this movie seriously?  Perhaps you need to get a reality check Akshay but the reason we go to movies is to be entertained.  Action movies are entertaining and tend to have simplistic plots only so that most of the audience can keep up.  "Nationial Treasure" was different in that it wasn't based off of a book that people could read along to ("The Da Vinci Code") and people were genuinely confused and intrigued by it.  I would go so far as to say that "National Treasure" was as much if not more entertaining than "The Da Vinci Code" due to it being fresher and funnier.  For goodness sakes take a look at the audeince we're dealing with:  "The Da Vinci Code" has an illustrated version…read that last part again to let it sink in.

I will now address the core idea behind Akshay's argument:  "sequels are unnecessary".  Really?  Just like the first movie is necessary?  No movie is necessary.  No sequels are necessary.  People would have been quite happy with just one "Bourne" movie.  People were quite happy with one "Star Wars" movie ("A New Hope"…why do you think it had that funky awards ceremony ending?).  Heck, "Rush Hour" didn't need "Rush Hour 2" (and it really doesn't need "Rush Hour 3"…seriously, it's terrible) but it did.  So why do all these sequels exist?  People and history aren't simple concepts that can be compacted into one 2 hour (or less) viewing period.  Both have an awful lot of interesting items and interesting people (especially) are hard to create and find in the movies.  Once you have an established character that people can recognize and identify then you can more easily tell more stories about that character.  That's why there are sequels.  I would rather there be a thousand terrible sequels lest I miss out on the few gems.  You want examples?  See below.

Jason Bourne.
Indiana Jones.
Rocky, of course there were a couple misses in there but you can't go wrong with Mr. T, Hulk Hogan, and Dolph…plus the last movie was excellent.
Rambo.
Star Wars.
Back to the Future.
Shrek ("The Third" was a let down but four might be much better).
Lord of the Rings.
James Bond.
Evil Dead series.
The Man With No Name series (particularly "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly").
Aliens (yes, "Aliens" is correct as "Alien" was the first one).
Godfather.
Toy Story.
X-Men.
Terminator.
Superman.
Spider-Man.
Star Trek.
Mad Max/Road Warrior.
Kill Bill.

I think I've said enough there.  Plus, I have the feeling that he agrees with me.