Da Vinci Code Sequel

Sony's Amy Pascal says that Ron Howard and Brian Grazer will be back for the Da Vinci Code sequel. Why doesn't Slate's Kim Masters believe her?

Comments

[David Poland]

VC will be Sony's biggest hit other than the Spider-Mans in its history.

Moreover, on what planet does Kim think that Brian Grazer is walking away from Imagine's biggest hit ever?

There is an outside shot that Ron Howard, who has never directed a sequel, could hire another director. But there is zero chance that Imagine will not be a key player in this unavoidable sequel, along with Calley, and Sony.

No studio walks away from a franchise that may double the worldwide gross of the biggest Bond film ever. Kim seems to have her "oh, it hurt so bad" Cannes bullshit suit on. The media needs to get over itself.

[Anne Thompson]

Did you see Grazer and Howard on the Bart and Guber "Sunday Morning Shootout" show from Cannes? They both looked shell-shocked. Pascal has to say publicly that they're on board. But I would doubt that Howard would return for more abuse. The movie got a 23% rating from Rotten Tomatoes! Grazer and Howard care about status and critics and respect and red carpet applause. That's why they (foolishly) went to Cannes. But they also care about money. Which is why I agree that Grazer and Imagine will want to keep their very big piece of a very big pie.

[Alan Green]

Anne and David

You know, I couldn't care less about DVC. I didn't read the book and I don't like that type of movie. But, I know enough to know what I think doesn't really matter. DVC may approach a billion dollars in worldwide grosses (despite the fact that I did not see it), and that’s without DVD dollars. That there will be a sequel can’t be debated. The public and the studio want it. Who will direct or star in it is another question.

So, why did so many people see this movie? We were told by the Cannes press that DVC was plodding at best. Was it because Ron Howard directed? Because Tom Hanks was in it? Give me a break. It was because the book the movie is based on sold 60 million copies. The fan base for this movie is gargantuan. People went to see this movie because they wanted to – because they liked the book.

Bruce Willis announced at Cannes that a Die Hard 4 is in pre-production. What makes that franchise a hit? The novel? No such thing. It’s Bruce Willis fighting the bad guys that people want to see. So, switching out Bruce for another actor would be ‘less than desirable’ for Die Hard 4. But, not so with DVC – Hanks and Tautou may have been appealing elements of the movie but they are not the reason people went to see it. Switch them out for the sequel and you will still have a huge hit. If Howard takes a pass, you still have a hit. Can you imagine someone saying, “Oh, no. I’m not seeing this movie because Ron what’s-his-name didn’t direct it.” Besides, Grazer is capable of producing a movie that Howard does not direct, is he not? I don’t think Grazer would take a pass – he may have looked shell-shocked at Cannes but I think this was sympathetic – in his heart he was all, “Yes! Score!” Howard, yeah – he was shell-shocked for real – but Grazer is ready to start the sequel.

Now, back to money. Hanks has enough of it and he’s not the kind of person to subject himself to more ridicule in order to secure a paycheck. His place in the industry is almost unshakeable. Tautou is up and coming and would probably seize the opportunity to become A-list. So, switch out Hanks? Why not? Nobody would notice. Switch out Tautou – no way, everybody would notice (but, it wouldn’t make a difference at the box office, and therein lies the rub).

It doesn’t matter what I think. What matters is what the public wants. So, I agree with you both. The sequel will be made, and it will be made with or without any or all of the principals from the first movie. If none of the same people return for the sequel a lot of fans will find it a criminal trespass and will refuse to see the movie. But, that won’t make any difference. The sequel will make gobs of money despite their protests, despite the fact that I won’t see it, and no matter who directs or stars in it.

Kim Masters is not out of line suggesting that Howard and Hanks may not return for the sequel. After all, all she said was there is no deal in place at this time. (I don’t think she suggested that Grazer or Imagine would not be involved). Of course Pascal would assure us that Ron and Tom will return for the next movie – telling us everything is status quo is a reflex for an executive – but it doesn’t necessarily mean anything. The only thing that counts is the fact that the book sold 60 million copies and the public wants another flick. Who stars in or directs the sequel won’t even register.