FG was a great movie am surprised there wasn't a sequel. It would make so much money like the original.
Is it true the second book flopped? So why not hire someone else to write a script?????
2007-01-12 07:16:33 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
You guys are nuts. Sequels not do well? SPIDERMAN 2 MADE MORE MONEY THAN THE ORIGINAL!!!!!!!! TERMINATOR 2 MADE MORE MONEY THAN THE ORIGINAL!!!!!!! AND THERE ARE MORE THAT I CAN'T THINK OF RIGHT NOW....
But my point is.... a sequel will make money.... unless it's horrible. But then again how did Scary Movie have 3 sequels.
2007-01-12 07:35:29 · update #1
How do you know a sequel wouldn't be better? I loved Spiderman 1 but love Spiderman 2 better! I'm sure Spiderman 3 will be even better!
FG 2 would be great too if they could find the correct script!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-01-12 07:40:17 · update #2
Of course I get what youre saying about that not all sequals are bad but fg 2 just wouldnt have the same magic as the first one there really wouldnt be anything to write about in the script to make it interesting.
2007-01-12 08:08:02 · answer #1 · answered by A Friend Of The Band I Swear 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I love that movie but I wouldn't want hollywood to make a sequel as sequels almost always fail. The only sequel noteworthy was The Godfather Part 2.
2007-01-12 07:27:15 · answer #2 · answered by gandalf 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Havent you learned by now! sequels NEVER do well ... a movie is better off leaving while there ahead! and i think your just about the only person who liked forest gump that much to want a sequel. Many times i see sequels and they are so horrible and pointless they mess up the first one.
2007-01-12 07:22:59 · answer #3 · answered by NA2006 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why ruin it with a sequel? There are a handfulll of movies that you can have a secone with out going over board. I think the one and only Forest Gump is just perfect.
2007-01-12 07:36:39 · answer #4 · answered by micah z 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There have been rumors floating around for sometime about a Sequel There was a second book called "Gump and Co"
2007-01-12 07:22:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
A lot depends on Tom Hanks. If Tom won't do it, why bother.
But, to rise to defense, the general rule of thumb is "sequels are equals"
For every one you can cite that was good ("Godfather II"), I can site twice as many that weren't ("Grease 2", "Stayin' Alive")
2007-01-12 08:13:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
After one of the answers I got earlier, because Paramount Pictures Studios refuses to get up off the money. (funny money) Risiduals to the book author.
2007-01-12 07:24:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because life is like a box of chocolates.
2007-01-12 07:23:52 · answer #8 · answered by hazeleyedbeauty1967 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
da first was too long already
it was really 1 and 2
2007-01-12 07:21:04 · answer #9 · answered by Derr 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
why would you want to mess with the best and most remembered movie ever made? if it's not broken.. dont fix it
2007-01-12 07:24:12 · answer #10 · answered by Carrie J 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋