"Paramount Cancels Anchorman 2" - Cinematical
Two years ago I pondered the rumors of a sequel to Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (among my Top 10 Movies of the Decade). I'd forgotten about this idea entirely until I heard that writer/director Adam McKay recently tweeted that Paramount "basically passed" on a sequel (unbeknownst to me a deal was apparently imminent).
I think this is probably for the best. Anchorman came along right when pop culture was obsessed with the 70's (Starsky and Hutch, anyone?), when Will Ferrell was a red hot commodity, and when Steve Carell was known only (if he was known at all) as the gibberish-talking Evan Baxter in Bruce Almighty. None of those three elements are true anymore, and besides, I'll be the first to admit that Anchorman is a one-note tune that doesn't need to be diluted by a sequel.
What else does this all mean?
1. I still find it ridiculous that news is legitimately released via Twitter.
2. Adam McKay can go back to making awful movies that aren't Anchorman.
3. Everybody who hates Anchorman can celebrate. Their wrongness.
It is probably for the best. It would be extremely hard for them to recreate the magic of the first film. That being said, if anybody could... it would only work if they get everyone back. At least that would give the filmmakers a fighting chance.
ReplyDeleteSee, but I feel like even if they got everyone back (which would be the ONLY way it should be done) it would be a different situation. Nobody could buy Carell as Brick anymore because he's a huge star (same goes for Paul Rudd, kind of). And Ferrell's characters have been recycled enough so that they're already wearing a little thin.
ReplyDeleteYes, the more I think about it the more I realize this truly is a cause for celebration. And people should celebrate by watching and savoring Anchorman.
It's a good thing you don't read a lot of crappy movie news sites because whenever any Anchorman cast member would turn up for a press junket, one of them would ALWAYS ask about a sequel and they'd always get the same non-answer "Everyone wants to do one, but there's no script yet and no one has agreed to pay for it."
ReplyDeleteI'm sooooo glad Paramount peed on this particular campfire just to stop these stupid questions. Now if people would just stop asking Bill Murray about Ghostbusters 3, I'd be a happy internet camper. Wait, no I wouldn't. I'm actually enjoying his increasingly cranky responses.
Shocking!!! I guess they thought the price tag was too much. Anchorman is one of my favorite comedy of last decade so I'm sort of glad they don't get a chance to ruin it but this might a sign of the times that a (costly) sequel is not being made.
ReplyDeleteI've missed Murray's thoughts on Ghostbusters 3 but I'm glad he's against the idea. Somebody needs to stand up and fight against the sequel machine - especially sequels of franchises from generations past.
ReplyDeleteInteresting point about the cost, Castor, because one would think they would be confident this would make some sweet moolah from the fan base. As ambivalent as most fans may be, pretty much everybody would show up to see what a sequel would be like.
If it's a sign that Hollywood is moving beyond sequels after a decade of churning them out, now THAT would be awesome.
I'm not sad about this. The first movie was good, at times approaching brilliantly funny, but what need is there for a sequel? The last I'd want is for "Anchorman" to turn into the festering turd that is the "Shrek" franchise.
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by, M. Carter. Indeed, soon Anchorman might have not only had bad sequels, but bad sequel names ("Shrek Forever After"?).
ReplyDeleteI hope you aren't including Step Brothers when you diss all other Adam McKay movies besides Anchorman. I love Anchorman as much as the next guy, but Step Brothers is absolute comedy gold.
ReplyDeleteUm. Sorry...
ReplyDelete