Despite profitability, Insidious 2 far from a sure thing
It seems to be standard practice in Hollywood today that if a movie makes money, it gets a sequel, no questions asked.
No one should know this better than James Wan, who saw his original SAW creation spawn a film series that spanned almost a decade, with new installments being churned out on a bloody assembly line because costs were so low.
The same could be true for his newest project, INSIDIOUS, which even though it hasn't quite gotten the same mainstream fanbase as SAW, it is in fact the most profitable film of the year, bringing in close to 70 times its budget. But this time around, a sequel is NOT guaranteed as producer James Blum explains:
”There's no plan, no release date, nothing like that," says Blum. "I think James feels the same as Oren Peli, who was very sceptical about doing a sequel to Paranormal Activity until Michael Peri pitched an idea and it made sense. If Leigh comes up with a story that's inventive and that James feels is worth making - as opposed to 'let's make another movie and make money' - we would do it. And if Leigh doesn't, we won't."
I believe the rule is "just because you can, it doesn't mean you should" and it's nice to see someone at least appearing to resist cash-grabbing in Hollywood these days. Until we hear "the right idea" I suppose.
|Extra Tidbit:||I believe the best recent example of the "could/should" rule recently would be THE HANGOVER PART II.|
|Source:||Shock Till You Drop|