LATEST NEWS
Robert Mark Kamen Says Fox Wants to Make 'Taken 3' for the Money
by Ethan Anderton
October 9, 2012
Source: Hollywood.com
Just over a week after Liam Neeson said that he couldn't imagine making Taken 3, the box office numbers for Taken 2 just might mean he gets a big enough paycheck to change his mind. The sequel (which our own Jeremy Kirk rather disliked) scored $49.5 million at the box office last weekend, and that's enough for Fox and writer Robert Mark Kamen to make another one. The writer recently spoke with Hollywood.com (via ComingSoon), and he says, ""We didn't start talking about it until we saw the numbers. But then we said, 'Oh, okay. I think we should do a third one.' And Fox wants us to do a third one." Oh, joy.
It's always good to hear that a sequel is getting made because the studio wants more money and not because there's already the idea for a good story. Critics have not been kind to the movie as it only has 19% on Rotten Tomatoes, and this is coming from people who mostly enjoyed the first action romp. Thankfully, Kamen says, "We've taken everyone we can take — it's going to go in another direction. Should be interesting." In the words of Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
This franchise sounds like it could end up going the route of The Hangover series. The second film was an uninspired cash grab and now the third film is supposedly not a carbon copy of the first one. Let's just go for all the marbles and have Bryan Mills taken by Jigsaw for a new Saw film. Or maybe, he's consulting on a movie being made about the events of the first film, and the actor playing him (also Liam Neeson), is kidnapped and he has to get him back. Or maybe Bryan Mills can figure out who took all the damn inspiration out of Hollywood?
37 Comments
1
"Studio Wants Financially Successful Series To Continue" should be the headline here. Spare us the faux outrage, Ethan. Up next: "Politician Stretches Truth."
Cakes on Oct 9, 2012
2
When the story comes after the star says he can't see doing a third one, yeah, I'm going to be annoyed. Nothing faux about my outrage. And just because it's commonplace doesn't mean we have to enjoy it.
Ethan Anderton on Oct 9, 2012
3
Don't make Liam Neeson the scapegoat. I have good money that says that if Neeson changes his mind in the next interview, you'll still crap all over the story.
Jim on Oct 9, 2012
4
I'm not making Liam Neeson the scapegoat at all. I'm annoyed that Taken 3 is happening at all, especially since Taken 2 was abysmal. But the fact that Neeson said he couldn't see doing it, and Fox is all gung ho about it, just make it more annoying. In fact, if Neeson changes his mind, I'll probably be even more frustrated with Taken 3. So it's not much of a bet you're making.
Ethan Anderton on Oct 9, 2012
5
... if Liam Neeson changes his mind and does Taken 3 or whatever, he'll lose 1% of his awesomeness for me. There's no place for the story to go without turning into a parody. Man, give those poor people a chance. Mother and daughter should be totally traumatized by now...
Yahzee on Oct 10, 2012
7
Wait... what ?? A studio wants to make a sequel simply for the money ?? For the love of all that is holy, say it isn't so !!!
Tester on Oct 9, 2012
8
You know I have a idea for Taken 3, how about Bryan Mills has to rescue...THE PRESIDENT!! Oh it's going to be marvellous if they do that. Bryan is recruited by a government agency led by Bruce Willis. They could even make some tie ins with The Expendables or some references to connect the popular franchises. As long as it's not another family member being Taken to keep the series fresh.
JerseyBoy on Oct 9, 2012
10
People, you *cannot* complain about Hollywood being out of ideas when you pay your hard earned money to see derivative, rehashed drivel. You know what that tells studios? "We want more." Vote with your wallets, seriously.
axalon on Oct 9, 2012
11
I never really got this argument, how are we suppose to know if a movie is bad and therefor not deserving of our support if we don't see it?
Ricardo_PT on Oct 9, 2012
12
The same way people have been finding out if movies are worth seeing for years: read reviews. Find sites that you trust to get opinions, go on Twitter, Facebook, Rotten Tomatoes, or Metacritic. The internet is pure information sharing - use it to your advantage. And if all else fails, just wait to rent it, because it'll only be 3 or 4 months until it's on DVD/Blu-ray/Streaming.
axalon on Oct 9, 2012
13
Film is purely subjective... You can't objectively say a film is bad or good... Sometimes there are those you agree with more often than not, and yeah, read reviews... Usually, though, don't read the reviews until AFTER you've seen the movie...
Greg dinskisk on Oct 9, 2012
14
"You can't objectively say a film is bad or good" Oh come on man. Are people honestly walking into "Taken 2" with its abysmal 20% on Rotten Tomatoes thinking "hey, maybe this will be good!" If they are then they deserve to sit through that heap of crap. And they, in turn, deserve to have the same shit made over and over and served to them. But hey, at least they have something original to contribute when they're huddled around their friends saying "yeah man, Hollywood is just out of ideas!".
axalon on Oct 9, 2012
15
... I don't check ratings or reviews unless, I have absolutely no idea what the film is about. If the character-story seems interesting to me or there's a director-actor I like I will see the movie regardless. I don't let other people's perception of a "bad movie" affect my interest in it. On the other hand I listen when people says something I'm not interested is really good and eventually will give that movie a chance...
Yahzee on Oct 10, 2012
16
Some movies work for some people, and some work for others. On Monday, I heard five different people telling me that Taken 2 was fantastic, and I should watch it (I don't have any longing to, since I didn't like the first one). Rotten Tomatoes scores mean NOTHING..... My favorite Oliver Stone movie, Natural Born Killers, has a 40 something percent... My least favorite Quentin Tarantino movie has the highest score. Film isn't objective. If you think it is, thinking you can classify all films as 'good' or 'bad,' you're ignorant. That's why we have this thing called an 'opinion.'
Greg dinskisk on Oct 10, 2012
17
And this is why Hollywood proceeds as it does.
axalon on Oct 10, 2012
18
What do you mean?
Greg dinskisk on Oct 10, 2012
19
A majority of people could have absolutely done without a Taken 2 let alone a Taken 3. But there's no accounting for taste, and you have apparently 5 friends that go against the grain and say that Taken 2 is amazing. Those people are the reason why we read stories like "Fox wants more of the same with 'Chronicle 2'", because audiences really do want more of the same crap. And you know what? That's exactly what they'll get.
axalon on Oct 10, 2012
20
It's not crap in their minds. In my mind, I don't enjoy mindless movies like that, but they enjoy it. Don't be bitter because people like things you don't like.
Greg dinskisk on Oct 10, 2012
21
Who said anything about being bitter, scroll up and read my very first post, in fact here I'll quote it: "People, you *cannot* complain about Hollywood being out of ideas when you pay your hard earned money to see derivative, rehashed drivel. You know what that tells studios? "We want more." Vote with your wallets, seriously."
axalon on Oct 10, 2012
22
Tell me Batman & Robin could be an objectively good film, I dare you...
interloper on Oct 10, 2012
23
... that is a huge exception. But I know a person or two who liked that one. Hey, I'm not judging, but there's an audience for everything I guess...
Yahzee on Oct 10, 2012
24
I said no film, even Batman and Robin, can be classified objectively as 'good' or 'bad.' Some like Batman and Robin a ton, because they find it remarkably humorous.
Greg dinskisk on Oct 10, 2012
25
That, but also go to movies with good reviews. Don't tell people not to go see a movie with a bad rating they think or know they will like.
Bk on Oct 9, 2012
26
I liked Hangover 2. Haven't seen Taken 2.
OfficialJab on Oct 9, 2012
27
Problem with Hangover 2/Hangover was that Hangover wasn't as horrible as some people made it out to be. I thought Taken was just average. Didn't see why they needed a second.
notalent on Oct 9, 2012
28
Maybe Bryan Mills will seek revenge for the mauling of his twin brother somewhere in Alaska.
grimjob on Oct 9, 2012
29
... I think they could use a plot where they kidnap his second favorite cousin?
Yahzee on Oct 10, 2012
30
So...they kidnapped his daughter and then he killed them all, their employers take his wife, then I assume he kills them all (havn't seen it yet but obviously he wins)...do they take his pet cat in part 3 or something?
interloper on Oct 10, 2012
31
Yes! Saw Taken 2! loved It! they should do more movies like this it where there is explosions and things and action, like the movie last year "Abduction"-they just need a better action hero star like Taylor Lautner, And he can do karate! Cant wait for taken 3
Ashely on Oct 10, 2012
32
I hope you get aids ashely!
Rick Warren on Oct 10, 2012
33
Honesty is the best policy.
DAVIDPD on Oct 10, 2012
34
... nice photo for the article. Really, I liked both films but the idea of a third one is just plain stupid. In Liam Neeson's words "oh, come on" taken AGAIN!? Move onto new stuff and take the risk! (although that may be asking too much of greedy studio execs and producers right?)
Yahzee on Oct 10, 2012
35
Followed shortly by the Taken Legacy....
Steven on Oct 10, 2012
36
I still haven't seen the 2nd one...
BloodwerK on Oct 10, 2012
37
I hope Liam Neeson shows some class and bails out of this pointless cash grab.
castingcouch on Oct 11, 2012
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.
FEATURED POSTS
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