Paramount's Top Contenders to Direct Paranormal Activity 2
by Alex Billington
February 25, 2010
Source: LA Times
I got to give it to Paramount, they turned Paranormal Activity into a worldwide phenomenon. It's not just a success either, because that doesn't describe how huge this movie has become. Sure, it could be a marketing trick, but I'm impressed that so many filmmakers and industry folk have come to embrace the movie, from Steven Spielberg to, as we just found out, Brian De Palma. But now they're making a sequel. When they tried to get Saw VI director Kevin Greutert to direct it (to compete directly with Saw VII), Lionsgate forced him to return. So who are they looking at instead to direct Paranormal Activity 2 in six months time?
The LA Times says that they currently have three top contenders: Brian De Palma, the veteran director of everything from Carrie to Scarface to The Untouchables to Mission: Impossible to The Black Dahlia; Brad Anderson, director of The Machinist and Transsiberian; and Greg McLean, director of horror films Wolf Creek and Rogue. The latter two seem like reasonable choices, but De Palma? You've got to be kidding me! De Palma is certainly a talented director, but I don't think there's anything he can bring to this sequel (that shouldn't even be made to begin with). At least that's how I feel about De Palma's potential involvement.
Even though Paramount wants Paranormal Activity 2 out in theaters on October 22nd this year - 239 days from today - apparently the screenplay is still being finished. And, well, they still don't have a director even though the movie is due out in six months. Whoever gets hired will be under quite a bit of pressure, not only to deliver on time, but to deliver a sequel that lives up to the original and can make them as much money as the first one (which is pretty much impossible since it made a astonishing $108 million). I'm predicting now that it's going to fail no matter which of these three they decide to hire, but we'll wait and see what happens.
Interestingly, LA Times mentions that Paramount considered hiring Akiva Goldsman, the producer/writer best known for writing The Da Vinci Code, Angels & Demons, and I Am Legend, but hasn't actually directed a feature film. "He won't direct the film in the end, but the fact that Paramount and the movie's producers were considering him suggests they want to give the film a different kind of gloss than the no-budget, unknown-driven first picture." I think that "different kind of gloss" already sounds like the kind I don't want to see. I just can't get behind this sequel at all and the more we hear about it, the worse it gets. This is going to be like the Blair Witch sequel all over again. Do any of these directors sound like a good choice?
Just leave it alone. It needs no sequel. It's going to suck. The reason the first worked so well was because it was so low budget. Hell it was NO budget. And had an unknown director and actors. Just drop it.
Film Fan on Feb 25, 2010
The first one sucked, the second one will defy the laws of physics by sucking and blowing at the same time.
WB Exec on Feb 25, 2010
Agree with N°1. I just saw "Paranormal Activity" the day before yesterday, and it was one of the creepiest movies i´ve seen in my life. The idea of a sequel totally sucks, just as "The Books of Shadows" sucked big time and almost tainted the succes of its predecessor. But meh.. what can you do? Paramount obviously saw the big money the first one made so... the rest its inevitable. At least i will keep the memory of having had one of the most unsettling and disturbing hour and half i´ve had watching a movie in my life with the first one.. it was a truly memorable experience, inteligently developed, nicely acted, unexpected, not cheap... Oren Peli deserves all the succes he can get 🙂 .
shy guy on Feb 25, 2010
I honestly think the first 2 would be great directors for the film. But having this rushed will ruin it.
Dan W on Feb 25, 2010
PA was "ok". actually, from the build-up it received i expected MUCH more from it. i don't see the need for a sequel nor would i pay to see it in theatres. ( i saw the first one on dvd) but, i'm sure there is going to be a "part 2" and at this time next year they'll be talking about #3.............as long as they make money, i guess they'll keep making them.
beavis on Feb 25, 2010
I am shocked Paramount is considering such decent directors for such a frivilous sequel. Making so much money the first one, I guess Paramount figured they can spend a little and hope for a bit more cash upon the investment. Paramount has to be out of their minds to think that this will do at least HALF of the first did. PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, like BLAIR WITCH is a once in a lifetime event movie anamoly. PA did so great to begin with because it was marketed as REAL. Of course, everybody knows it was not, but they let their minds buy into it and had a good time. SAW, a franchise I still enjoy out of tradition of seeing it every year (1,2,3 were great, 4 and 5 went WAY down hill, but 6 really brought it back up again), worked sequel-wise, because the whole entire marketing scheme for the first was not based off of a GIMMICK of "real events." It was based on STORY so a sequel, made some sort of sense to continue the story. Here it does not. This will play out exactly like BLAIR WITCH 2, but with a good director they are hoping for not as hard of a fall probably. While I am 100% against this idea, if they HAD to make it, I would like to see them take it in the direction of making it like a REAL movie and have Katie be a demon-possessed-serial-killer. I mean, what else can they do?
Ryan on Feb 25, 2010
Either way, blair witch project 2 certainly comes to mind.
Dan on Feb 25, 2010
this movie looked like crap....what the hell is going on?
Voice of Reason on Feb 25, 2010
There's already a sequel. Unless I'm mistaken. I read about it months ago. Some special iPhone promotion. It was called the search for Katie or something.
Brian Ricci on Feb 25, 2010
Sorry but like Blair Witch and I've had plenty of reviews, this movie sucked. I sub and every kid that has seen this though it sucked or was ok and when I mention a sequel they all ask why. Never the less, this movie sucked and I'm glad I didn't waste money on it. I thought it'd be good, cheap but to the point yet it still simply sucked. It was cheap not just cost the the talent, the writing, all blah. I was bored.
tra la la la la di da on Feb 25, 2010
um..not to dis but.. I rented this ondemand and I couldnt get past the first 10 minutes of this! im seeing on this thread that maybe I wasnt the only one. Im shocked to hear that so many directors were impressed with this, it honestly makes me want to try watching it again..just a little..not that much..maybe when it hits cable for free I might try again..but..yea..its blair witch all over again..( I remember watching the crowd more than the film wondering "What the hell are they seeing that Im not?")
lando Calrizzle on Feb 25, 2010
the studios need to leave this remake alone. If not, its going to be horrible.
bubba b on Feb 26, 2010
See if i was the director id make a second one as soon as i'm done with the first one like writing two seperate scripts at the same time or have a continuing sequal off the first one, but that's just me....it would be alot easier if you see how i put it together.
K-Ike on Feb 26, 2010
I think this movie is going to suck just like the first one. I was sitting through the entire first one preying that something cool was going to happen. But no. All there was is a couple doors slamming and some chick gets dragged out of her bed. If I was Micah and I had a girl friend that was being tortured by a demon since she was eight, I would dump her ass. I don't want to be tortured.
King Aweasome on Apr 7, 2010
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.
FOLLOW FS HERE
Follow Alex's main account on Twitter:
Add our posts to your Feedly › click here
Get all the news sent on Telegram
LATEST TO WATCH