You might have heard: Paul Rudd is sort of a big deal these days, popping up in a bunch of new movies and even more online rumors, like the recently slimed “Ghostbusters” sequel – a sequel which, if it ever happened, would probably never live up to the original, he said (you can check out our full interview with Rudd here).
But 60% of the time, sequels work every time. Could “Anchorman 2” actually be one of those rare films to surpass the original? Only if they’re prepared to take the insanity of the first one and somehow surpass it, Rudd insisted. (And I promise I’m done with the “Anchorman” quotes).
“Last I heard they were starting to write it and they were thinking about setting it in the eighties,” Rudd said. “[But] I know when we were shooting it [director] Adam [McKay] said if they ever did something it would have to be really weird like we were on the moon or something. I think it has to go even further if it was to work.”
For his part, of course, Rudd is positively giddy at the prospect of returning to play Brian Fantana should the long-talked about script ever actually materialize.
“I don’t know if it’s a throwaway comment Adam McKay had made at some premiere or something. I think [he’s]’s interested in the idea. I think Will [Ferrell] is too,” Rudd told MTV News. “Certainly it was so fun to make that if they were to do another one I think we’d all be really interested in it.”
We already know you support an “Anchorman” sequel, so our question of the day is: Do you agree with Rudd? Does the sequel have to be even more absurd than the original to work? Or is the simple 80s concept enough to have you juiced? Sound off below.