MovieChat Forums > Ruthless People (1986) Discussion > Would a sequel be a bad idea?

Would a sequel be a bad idea?


I say this as a huge fan of Ruthless People and it had me thinking because there's a lot of remakes and at least this movie might get a better release on DVD to coincide with a sequel. As it is the movie is on DVD with no extras, the cover art is atrocious (the original cover art is hilarious) and it doesn't make any sense to have such a flimsy release given how success the film was. It received positive reviews, has a 92% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. This film deserves a Blu-ray release too even if there are no extras to include.

With all that said there's more than just a better release on DVD/Blu-ray because there's so much material for a sequel that there could've been a plethora of sequels back in the day. Let's say the sequel focuses on Sam who's alone, broke, working a menial job with no prospects but he sees Barbara thriving and she's written a best selling book about her "hostage ordeal" which is of course fiction because Barbara made it all up about how the bedroom killer was so brutal and cruel to her when we all know that never happened. But she then writes another best selling book that was later adapted into a movie (in which she writes the screenplay) that became a box office smash about a woman who was kidnapped and her husband refuses to pay the ransom and is very "similar" to their whole ordeal and Sam always knew the man who met him at the plaza that day for the ransom drop looked nothing like the bedroom killer. They didn't have the same build or the same eyes, nothing. He knows the husband character in Barbara's book was based on him and he wants to sue her but he waits so many years later because the statute of limitations has expired so he wouldn't be in trouble for lying to the police and not telling them about getting calls from the kidnappers regarding the ransom. He also has this sneaking suspicion that Barbara was never kidnapped in the first place, that she was probably at some expensive health spa with a guy and both of them cooked up this idea to take him for a ride.

There's so many places a sequel could go so why not? The worst that could happen is having a crappy sequel but it would be fun to see what Sam Stone is up to in the new millennium, along with Barbara, Ken and Sandy. Danny DeVito is supposedly doing a sequel to Twins with Arnold and Eddie Murphy. Even Bette returned to the big screen in Parental Guidance so both Danny and Bette are doing movies today, bad ones especially, so I don't think either would have an qualms about doing a sequel to this movie. Judge Reinhold and Helen Slater haven't worked in a while so it seems like a better time than ever to get it off the ground.

It's better than a remake, right? If that's the only alternative I'll take it plus I'd love to see what the characters are up to. I'd see it on opening night. Does anyone else agree or am I alone on this?

reply

God have mercy on our souls if they make a sequel to this movie.

Let me summarize every sequel to a comedy ever in nine words:

"The characters from the first movie go somewhere else."

Try to think of an exception.

reply

<crickets chirping>

I really enjoyed the movie, but I don't think a sequel is needed.

reply

I love Bette Midler's character the most.
She was obnoxious and self-absorbed. It would be terrific to see a sequel showcasing what happened to her afterwards.
A story on the ruthless, cutthroat business of fashion industry wouldn't be bad.

reply

What percentage of sequels equal or surpass the original? Not a lot!

Alien,Aliens
Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Spider Man, Spider Man 2
The Terminator, The Terminator 2

But for comedy? That's pretty rare. Some of the original Pink Panther sequels were very good.

It's spelled Raymond Luxury Yacht, but it's pronounced 'Throat-Warbler Mangrove'

reply