New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Sex and the City 2: We Know You'll Spend the Money for It

Kim Hollis: If you were Warner Bros., would you be pushing for a Sex and the City sequel or would you believe this was a crazy result that could never be duplicated?

Max Braden: If I were a studio I'd devote all my time to another Jason Bourne movie, Tron 2, Buckaroo Banzai 2, Real Genius 2, and Zero Effect 2. I'd also try to figure out how to do Braveheart 2 and Collateral 2. And in my haste to grab crossover dollars I'd probably make the career ending move of greenlighting Sex and The High School Musical, starring Britney Spears. But I'm sure the folks over at WB will figure out a way to do it right.

Pete Kilmer: If Warner Bros. was smart, they locked everyone in for a three-picture deal. But again Max is right, they need to greenlight Real Genius 2.

Tim Briody: The time is right for Kim Cattrall to return to the Mannequin movies. No, really, I'm a little stunned at its budget ($65 million) but provided they got an option out of each of the leads for at least one more, I don't see why they wouldn't go to the well one last time since it's guaranteed to be in the black by the end.

Joel Corcoran: I'm going to diverge and say it's a one-shot deal. This movie was what the television series finale should've been, and without giving away any spoilers, I think it would be very difficult to make a sequel that both continued the storyline and retained the whole Sex and the City atmosphere. Maybe Warner Bros. can release Sex and the City 2: The Golden Girls in about 20 or 30 years, though. And I also agree with Max - we need another Jason Bourne movie and Tron 2.





Reagen Sulewski: I think the event-ness of this is something that can't be recaptured. But if they're going to do another one, they have to do it quickly, as in 2009. Do not wait ten years like The X-Files.

David Mumpower: "Should they do a sequel?" and "Will they do a sequel?" are two statements that are never the same in Hollywood. And if you disagree, simply consider that Beverly Hills Cop 4: Life after the Amusement Park Shootout was announced this week. With regards to whether a sequel should be made, we all know the answer to that one. It's common sense. The discussion about whether there will be a sequel is much more complex. Warner Bros. stumbled into this distribution deal once New Line was swallowed. They have no true attachment to it, and I have to believe they are aware that they will not be catching lightning in a bottle twice. I am of the opinion that they will engage in preliminary discussions for a sequel this week. Then, they'll let future revenue and foreign grosses determine how to proceed. The latter avenue is the one that I believe will determine whether we get Sex and the City 2: The Legend of Curly's Gold.

Calvin Trager: Ahem, I believe I called dibs on using "lightning in a bottle" this week David. You got "one-trick pony" instead. Not too bad a deal for you given it's a Sara Jessica Parker movie.

Kim Hollis: I think the "should" of it is rather tricky, but I absolutely think they will. They're already talking about it, in fact. Now that they've done one, another one should be easy and old hat. And I'm sure the women of SATC aren't going to turn their noses up at more cash. Though my friend who went to the movie did note that unless they make the movie "Sex and the City and the Red Hat Society", it's just not going to work.

Calvin Trager: Add to it, if it wasn't already a foregone conclusion, a Devil Wears Prada redux.

Continued:       1       2       3