Why no # 3?


Why didnt they do a 3rd one? i mean they were both damn popular.

reply

thats what i was thinking!!
I would love to see a third one!



:)



this August, "Step Your Game Up"
..in 3D!
www.imdb.com/title/tt1193631/

reply

Chances were slim when the sequel came out due to poor critical reaction, and similar box office takings than the first film. It would have been a minor gamble on the studio's part.

Chances are even more slim now that John Forsythe (Charlie's voice) and Bernie Mac (Bosley #2) have unfortunately passed away, as well as bitterness between Lucy Lui and Bill Murray.

That is all.

reply

You're right. I think the chances of a third movie seem pretty thin. However I'm sure that they can find a replacement for Bernie Mac and Charlie's voice. Plus Murray and Liu can work things out. They are not kids !!!.

reply

[deleted]

You do have a point. But I have a doubt that they may find some way round that. Every movie that has had a sequal, has always ventured in to making a third movie.

reply

All three actresses have said they would want to do a third. They could still do one, Bill Murray wasn't in the second one, Bernie Mac could come back or just hire another "comedian" type actor again.

Anyway isn't MGM the studio that produced these 2 films seriously in debt?

reply

[deleted]

Theres nothing wrong with Bill Murray doing it again.

reply

All three actresses have said they would want to do a third.

No, Cameron said she doesn't want to.

reply

if you want a box office opinion on it. The first did well 125 million on a 90 million budget (domestically)...but the sequel (cleary) cost much more yet barely broke 100 million domestic. Its rare a franchise that makes less with each sequel but costs more would continue making them.

Unless its saw. Those films are so cheap they could.make half of the one before and still get a sequel.

reply

https://www.quora.com/How-come-there-was-never-a-third-Charlies-Angels-movie-with-Cameron-Diaz-Drew-Barrymore-and-Lucy-Liu/answer/Frank-Martin-15

The second movie had a massive jump in star salaries for the three women, nearly a 30% jump in production budget, and the same worldwide box office with a smaller percentage in domestic box office. I doubt that the sequel made a profit, and as the salary demands weren’t going down, there was no compelling reason to take the huge financial risk of a third one.

Cameron Diaz was paid $20 million for the Charlie’s Angels sequel, but she is said to have made over twice that amount 8 years later for Bad Teacher, a low budget film (1/6 budget of Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle) for which she accepted a $1 million salary plus points. Bad Teacher missed Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle’s worldwide box office by 17%, and Cameron Diaz made a whopping $42 million in participation.

In a sense Cameron Diaz got her payback for her film 13 years previously, There's Something About Mary, another low budget comedy that made other people a fortune while she was paid $2 million.

Cameron Diaz made another 5 films after “Bad Teacher”, but none of them were lightning in a bottle, so she seems to have retired after a 20 year movie career.

reply

Charlie's Angels 3 Teased by Director McG: 'Maybe We've Got One Left in Us'

https://www.cbr.com/charlies-angels-3-teased-by-director-mcg-maybe-weve-got-one-left-in-us/

McG reveals why he would return for Charlie's Angels 3 with Drew Barrymore, Lucy Liu, and Cameron Diaz in a heartbeat.

reply

Charlie's Angels 3 Gets Disappointing Response From OG Actor Lucy Liu 21 Years Later

https://screenrant.com/charlies-angels-3-update-possibility-lucy-liu-response/

Charlie's Angels 3 gets a disappointing response from original actor Lucy Liu 21 years later, as she expresses uncertainty about another sequel.

reply