web counter
 

Sequels to Clerks, Rounders, Swingers, Bad Santa, Among Others

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (13)

bad-santa-billy-bob-thornton-and-lauren-graham1.jpg

A while back, the Weinstein Brothers — who used to own Miramax — made a bid to repurchase it from Disney, but ultimately lost out in that bid. However, Miramax has now brought in the Brothers Weinstein into a long-term partnership developed so that the two companies can produce sequels to a few movies for which the Weinsteins were originally responsible. A slate of potential sequels was released that includes Rounders, Clerks III, Bad Santa, Copland, Shall We Dance, The Amityville Horror, From Dusk til Dawn and Swingers. Most shocking: Shakespeare in Love.

But before you get your drawers in a bunch (and I think we’ve probably moved past the point of being aghast at sequels or reboots to any movie), keep in mind that this is all very preliminary. Check your outrage. There are some very creative people in Hollywood (and by creative, I mean “spiritually bankrupt”), but I can’t imagine many, if any, of these projects will ever see a movie screen (save for, perhaps, Bad Santa and Clerks). You’ll never get the original casts back — is Gwyneth going to cross-dress again? Will Jon Favreau drop The Magic Kingdom to do Swingers? Will Matty Damon really come back for Rounders? — and to be honest, save for Shakespeare, none of these movies were particularly big hits in the first place. They all made something in the $30 to $40 million range, or what the original actors would command to return.

Maybe they use a new casts, which would only decrease the box-office prospects. But, really, how could any of these sequels make a profit? It’s not as though the originals command a huge audience in the new generation? And without a profit motive, there’s little reason to think any of the movies will be made. Studio henchman may be soulless, but they’re also rich. And they’d like to stay that way. Making sequels to most of the above movies is not a clever means for remaining so.

But then again …









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← SyFy To Hit Big Screen | This Oughta Be Good | If You Want to See My Tajazzle, You Better Treat Me Right | A Paid Sponsorship* →









Comments

Now go back and read through that list of sequels. Imagine Shia LaBeouf in every single one.

Posted by: penelope at December 16, 2010 10:55 AM

Clerks III: I need the fucking money because hey, that outsider routine ain’t all it’s cracked up to be and I need to pay the bills because it’s not about quality anymore it’s about quantity.

Posted by: Pookie at December 16, 2010 10:57 AM

Somebody wake me up when they make “Doing Time on Maple Drive II.”

Posted by: Pookie at December 16, 2010 11:06 AM

I'm waiting for Beverly Hills Cop 4. Also, Psycho 3-D.

When those two hit the theaters, I know it's time to crawl into the underground bunker.

Posted by: Wednesday at December 16, 2010 11:23 AM

While some of those may not have made a shiton of money while in the theater, I'll bet they garnered a big enought cult following after going to video that they would rake in considerably more--nostalgia, fanboys, new audiences, etc.

I know we continue to think Hollywood is about as smart as a bag of hammers but they're not. It's a numbers game; it always has been. You throw some shit on the wall and pray to godtopus it looks like art and sells. Sometimes it will, sometimes it won't. It's when they market the hell out of some bombs that makes me really laugh at em.

I, for one?, would see re-boots for FDTD (starring Clooney) and Rounders (starring Damon and Norton).

Posted by: gunnertec at December 16, 2010 11:29 AM

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

The world needs new Weekend At Bernie's films.

Posted by: Bronson at December 16, 2010 11:36 AM

Didn't they already make a sequel to FDTD?

Posted by: Brian at December 16, 2010 12:01 PM

C'mon Weinsteins! You're better than this! Better than sequel slumming! I think from Dusk til Dawn already has 2 sequels that went straight to dvd (thank you very much SyFy for airing them back to back)Shakespeare in Love sequel would prob just be some other story of Shakespeare writing some other famous play, like Shakespeare's Wicked Depression, rather than being so in love. Not so bad if they can get Joseph Fiennes again, but honestly, the idea of revisiting any of these movies after so much time is not only appalling but can only yield really sad paltry results, creatively or financially. Get it together Weinsteins!

Posted by: valerie at December 16, 2010 12:04 PM

I'd be fine with Bad Santa 2 and Clerks 3. The others are head scratchers unless they are just going to essentially remake the first using the same basic story but different characters. Like the Karate Kid sequel with the girl instead of Macchio.

Posted by: TylerDFC at December 16, 2010 12:16 PM

No way does Bad Santa 2 work. First of all, Bad Santa was filmed before Billy Bob's goddawful mannequinesque plastic surgery, so he really doesn't look like the same character anymore. Second, it won't make any damn sense. The whole point of a sequel is to put the same characters in the same situations they were in the first movie, and there's no way a guy who was just busted by the cops for using the Santa routine to case department stores would ever get hired by another department store again. Sure, they could just do it, screw all logic and common sense but...

Aw, hell, what difference does it make? Either it will happen or won't but the fact that its a shitballs retarded idea really doesn't factor into the equation.

Posted by: Irving Washington at December 16, 2010 2:09 PM

Lauren Graham confuses me.

She's inconsistently hot. I mean, her snaps, say on IMDB, reek of Ac-Tress. In the pseudo-skits when she guested on Studio 60 she was all earnest & stuff. Yet, office-bantering with the bromance brothers in the same episode she was all knowing-sexy. Then, in that shot above licking on the former Mr. Angelina, she's making me all a-tingle with the impish-hotness.

Can they make a sequel like "Multiple Personality Elf: Bad Santa Touched Me Wrong", so I can see all the different Lauren Grahams at once?

It's just research, people.

Posted by: BierceAmbrose at December 16, 2010 3:49 PM

bring back the worm

Posted by: sailboat at December 16, 2010 10:57 PM

Rounders is a film that could definitely work as a sequel. Given the way Worm (Ed Norton) didn't learn anything in the movie his initial character remains intact, The same can be said for Kinish and Teddy "KGB" two of my favorite characters in all of film, played by Turturow and Malcovich respectively.

This movie preceded the internet poker boom, so you leave Damon character out, maybe a cameo, and you have a young relatively unknown actor (ie NOT Lebouf) play an internet hot shot coming into the world created by the first movie, maybe he meet Worm online and, impressed by Worm playing, gets convinced to go to NYC, even though we see Worm is using computer tech that allows him to see all the other players hands. Hijinx ensue from there.

Could be doable.

Posted by: valetboy at December 17, 2010 7:53 AM