'Anchorman 2' Would Have Been a Broadway Musical

That Anchorman sequel Paramount refuses to fund? Director and co-writer Adam McKay says it was going to be a musical. He tells CHUD, "We were going to do four months on Broadway and then jump right into filming."

So, yes, the sequel would have been a stage show first, then a film, and Paramount didn't want to spend the $60 million to get it made, citing computer models that tell the studio under which circumstances a project may or may not make money. And that tells you all you need to know about Paramount, I guess. Actually, I may be too quick to judge the Mountain; it's put out some decent stuff lately, but seriously, you consult a computer? Why not just let a computer write the damn scripts, then?

Click to read more ...

'Anchorman 2' May Happen, With Budget Cuts

Here's the latest on Anchorman 2, and it's a bit of a reversal from last week. Deadline says Paramount and Adam McKay and Will Ferrell are nowhere near an agreeable budget figure, so if the filmmakers can jettison some costs, the movie might happen.

The problem is, McKay and Ferrell are working with a $70 million figure and Paramount wants it to be about half that much, $40 million, to be precise. To be fair to Paramount, you can make this movie for less than $70 million. The first movie cost $26 million, and minus salaries, the sequel could take advantage of tax breaks in any of 44 states that have deals in place for feature film production. It's really a question of putting the movie ahead of the stars. For instance, The Hangover cost $35 million. The Proposal cost $40 million. Paul Blart cost under $30 million. So it isn't about $40 million not being enough to make a film so much as it is $40 million not being enough to pay the actors what they're worth.

Click to read more ...

Paramount Passes on 'Anchorman 2'

Just a couple days ago, writer-director Adam McKay said there was still hope for Anchorman 2, citing how far Paul Rudd and particularly Steve Carell had dropped their prices to appear in the film. The hope was to get the green light and shoot early next year.

Instead, here's McKay's Tweet (via The Film Stage) from earlier today: "So bummed. Paramount basically passed on Anchorman 2. Even after we cut our budget down. We tried." I'm not entirely sure what happens now; certainly, you'd think McKay and Will Ferrell could shop it around, but there might be some sort of contractual language that prohibits that. I'm not totally shocked by Paramount's decision, though, because everyone involved has publicly stated they're all resigned to the fact that a sequel won't be nearly as good as the original.

Click to read more ...

'Anchorman' Sequel May Shoot Early Next Year

Much like the Arrested Development movie, the news about a possible Anchorman sequel has been completely positive or totally dismissive. Now Adam McKay tells MTV it's back in the first column, saying it's still moving ahead, although not without hurdles.

"It's a tricky movie because everyone went and did really well after it, so everyone's prices went up and everyone's time got a little more valuable," McKay said. "But at the same time, graciously, [Steve Carell and Paul Rudd] and everyone agreed to cut their price to come and do [the sequel], which you don't see very often in Hollywood — and cut their price substantially." That has to mean there have been more than rudimentary discussions, because fixing a lower price for an actor isn't something that just happens. So that tells me there must be some groupthink about where the movie will go and when it might happen. "But even with that," McKay adds, "it's just a budgetary thing with Paramount in terms of how much they'll give us to make it."

Click to read more ...

Will Ferrell Says 'Anchorman' Sequel Is On Hold

We certainly don't need an Anchorman sequel, but I always thought Will Ferrell and company could do more with Ron Burgundy and at least some of the other characters. We could see a prequel of Burgundy cutting his teeth in the 1960s or a later version of the newscasting legend in the 1980s, which would have the rise of 24-hour cable news as an obvious backdrop.

It looked as though a second film wouldn't take long to arrive after Steve Carell and Paul Rudd said last year they'd absolutely do it again. Now, however, Ferrell is singing a different tune. "I thought we were doing it. I was told it was happening and now I've heard it's going to be too hard to get everyone together," Ferrell told Zoo magazine. "Hopefully [director] Adam McKay will be able to talk to all the guys individually and see if we can figure it out."

Click to read more ...