Apple TV+ abandons Clooney and Pitt's 'Wolfs' sequel
A planned sequel to the Apple TV+ original movie "Wolfs" has reportedly been dropped, marking another unexpected turn for both this film series, and for how it appears Apple is changing its movie ambitions.
Brad Pitt, George Clooney in the film "Wolfs." Image credit: Columbia Pictures / Courtesy Everett Collection
Writer/director Jon Watts now says that he will not be doing a sequel, despite the first film's success. "[Apple] were extremely enthusiastic about it, and immediately commissioned me to start writing a sequel. But their last minute shift from a promised wide theatrical release to a streaming release was a total surprise and made without any explanation or discussion," he told industry publication Deadline.
"I was completely shocked and asked them to please not include the news that I was writing a sequel," Watts added. "They ignored my request and announced it in their press release anyway, seemingly to create a positive spin to their streaming pivot so I quietly returned the money they gave me for the sequel."
While never officially announced, the planned and reportedly greenlit "Wolfs 2" film was seen as a way to counter the poor publicity Apple had over its treatment of the original movie. Stars George Clooney and Brad Pitt both took substantial pay cuts in order to make sure this hitman action comedy got a wide theatrical release, which Apple initially planned.
However, shortly before release, Apple cut back its plans and instead gave it a single week in theaters. "Wolfs" would go on to be the most-watched Apple TV+ original film up to that point.
That streaming success could have made Apple reconsider its theatrical plans, especially for a sequel. However, Apple is said to have dramatically scaled back its slate following a series of high-cost flops, such as "Killers of the Flower Moon."
It's believed that Apple is waiting to see how its next major release, "F1" starring "Wolfs" co-lead Brad Pitt, fares in cinemas in summer 2025. Should that also fail to do well, Apple is expected to step away from high-budget fare and instead produce more films that are each lower cost.
The company may also choose to acquire finished movies instead of either producing itself, or being the sole investor in an independent production. Apple does already acquire films, with one of them being the acclaimed 2022 movie "CODA", which earned the first-ever Best Picture Oscar for a streamer.
"I loved working with Brad and George (and Amy and Austin and Poorna and Zlatko) and would happily do it again," said Watts, "but the truth is that Apple didn't cancel the Wolfs sequel, I did, because I no longer trusted them as a creative partner."
Deadline reports that sources within Apple continue to consider the film and success, and remain open to a sequel.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
The cliffhanger at the end of episode 1 was truly annoying.
I am not surprised. It was terrible. I gave it 1 star on rotten Tomatoes.
in one go rather than waiting on a weekly basis. Sometimes I would watch the first 10
mins of the next episode before I finish watching the current one 😉
The problem with so many streaming series is they are stuffed with time-sucking scenes. Silo S1 was a series I struggled to complete, and when it was over, I felt the first and last episodes where rather compelling - everything in the middle was an hour of storytelling spread over several hours.
As Joel (or Ethan) Cohen said on a Team Deakins podcast (paraphrasing) "Movies have a beginning, middle, and end. Streaming shows have a beginning, middle, middle, middle, middle and end."
Compression of time - say a two hour movie - demands more ingenious, compelling, and efficient storytelling where a good writers and directors imagine ways to convey something in inventive and sometimes awe-inspiring ways (ie the bone/spaceship cut in 2001). The largesse streaming doesn't preclude this, but the necessity of having 7-10 hours of "content" takes precedence over whether a story demands or deserves it.
Compression of time also is often better for tension/release (comedic or dramatic). In many long-format streaming shows (say Foundation or Invasion), there are hours of incidental scenes that do extremely little to tell the story). The "story" of Silo S1 took 8 hours to tell. Probably should have taken less than half that, making it much more compelling.
Of course there are movies that suck, and streaming shows that are tight and good, but too much content is the length it is not for the story, but for the streamer's catalog...