For anyone who took umbrage that Kristen didn’t recoil in horror and swear on a stack of bibles that she would never ever ever be in a SWATH sequel when she was questioned about in during one of her BD2 interviews, perhaps it would help to understand why the response that she gave was the only one she could give.

As I understand it, she wasn't asked if she as going to be IN the sequel, she was asked if there WOULD BE a sequel. And she said what we all know - there’s been talk about a sequel but no decision's been made yet. Here’s why she was absolutely right to answer the question that way:
Universal is part of a publicly held company (Comcast) -- were Kristen to sit there and say that there definitely wouldn’t be a sequel , or that she definitely wouldn't be in it, that would qualify as what’s known as a forward looking statement, i.e. a comment about the company's future investment and/or potential earnings that can impact the stock. And that would put her in deep shit with the studio, Comcast (which owns Universal) and the SEC.

Additionally, we know that her contract had an option for a sequel. Options usually have a lot of provisional details built in - for example the studio has a certain amount of time in which to commit to moving ahead (they can’t tie her up indefinitely) and on the artists side they usually build in certain conditions like script approval, etc. But considering the timing she is most likely still under some sort of provisional obligation to them should they decide to go ahead. So until Universal says either that they definitely are not making a sequel or they are making it but making the Huntsman the focus and therefore definitely will not be using Kristen in the movie, she can’t say she wouldn’t do it as that would be considered breach of contract.

Based on things I've heard from people in the industry I think there’s very little chance that a sequel will be made, but studios like to hedge their bets

Any questions?

Call me when the next drama breaks out.

Reply · Report Post