If it's crap ... We'll tell you
In what is easily the weirdest piece of news so far this week, it seems Universal is gearing up to produce a sequel to their 1988 action comedy 'Midnight Run.' The original film starred Robert De Niro as bounty hunter Jack Walsh who has to transport a bail-jumping, former mob accountant, played by Charles Grodin, across the country. The studio has been contemplating a sequel since last year when they tasked Tim Dowling ('Role Models') with writing a script. Now, it seems they've hired David Elliot and Paul Lovett ('G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra') to handle the re-write. Universal is now in talks with Brett Ratner ('Tower Heist') to direct with De Niro evidently set to reprise his role from the original film. The long-retired Grodin, shockingly, has mentioned that he would be willing to return as well should the script call for him.
Not sure where to start here. Why exactly does Universal think it's a good idea to do a sequel to a twenty-four year-old film? I mean it's not as if 'Midnight Run' is a totally obscure movie, but who is it that's been clamoring for a followup of late? Not only that, but I'm not exactly inspired by the writing team here (really, the guys behind that first G.I. Joe movie?). Also, Brett Ratner seems an odd choice for director here. Sure, he's done unlikely duo crime movies in the past (specifically the 'Rush Hour' flicks), but I can't imagine how the exaggerated characterizations of 'Rush Hour' would translate to a return to this property. It just reeks of a desperate cash grab. Plus, are we just going to ignore the three made-for-TV sequels to 'Midnight Run' that already exist? You know what, yes, we should ignore them. In order that some good comes out of this I will highly encourage anyone reading this who hasn't seen the original 'Midnight Run' to rectify this at once.
What do you guys think? Any fans of the original? Can this sequel possibly work?