To call the original 1996 film “Independence Day” a hit would be a massive understatement. The movie pulled in over $300 million at the domestic box office and well over $800 million for a world wide total.
These sorts of numbers generally get studios instantly into sequel frenzies, but such has not been the case for Independence Day as director Roland Emmerich has gone on to do such high profile films as The Day After Tomorrow, 2012, 10,000 B.C., Godzilla and others, and Will Smith has just gone on to be one of the most bankable movie stars in Hollywood. Smith has taken a few years off and we haven’t seen him on screen since his 2008 film Seven Pounds but he’s back in the swing of things and Men In Black 3 will be on screens next year.
Fox announced some time ago that they were looking to finally moving forward with the franchise and would actually be looking to do 2 Independence Day films back to back, but things got held up mostly due to budget issues (that’s the speculation anyway).
It’s now slipped out that director Roland Emmerich has completed the scripts for ID 2 and 3 and is ready to move forward with the projects… WITH OR WITHOUT WILL SMITH.
Why would they possibly consider moving forward without Will Smith, the most bankable star in Hollywood? Well, there are a few reasons why they COULD end up going ahead with Independence Day 2 and 3 without will Smith and why, even thought it would be better to have him there, they would work just fine without him.
1) Will Smith’s Demands
There are unconfirmed reports going around that Will Smith has apparently lost touch with reality. In a day when the economy is still not what it should be and the industry is struggling to a degree, Will Smith has demanded a $50 million salary for the 2 films. That’s $25 million for each film. He’s also demanding that the film shoot close to his home and that roles be made in the films for his family. It seems at some point the sun was removed from the solar system and Will Smith has taken it’s place… the universe now revolves around him.
2) Independence Day 2 and 3 Are Guaranteed To Make Truck Loads Of Money Either Way
News flash: Roland Emmerich films WITHOUT WILL SMITH seem to make a hell of a lot of money on their own too. 2012 made $670 million, The Day After Tomorrow made $540 million, 10,000 BC made $270 million… and with a brand name like Independence Day it’s a lock to be a major hit… with or without Will Smith. Hell, I could star in the film and it’ll still make $200 million. Why give one actor $50 million when you could get another (maybe better) actor for $15 or $20 million? Which leads us too…
3) There Are Better Actors Out There
Don’t misunderstand this point. I’m actually a big Will Smith fan. I think he’s a lot of fun to watch in his movies and I think he’s a better pure actor than a lot of people give him credit for. With that being said, there are a lot of better actors in Hollywood today. The last time I checked Smith’s Oscar shelf is still empty and even though he’s turned in a couple of great performances (like in Ali, The Pursuit of Happyness) he’s never been considered one of the great thespians in the business. Hell, he’s not even the best action guy anymore. The point is, for half of that $50 million pay cheque he’s demanding, you could get someone who would actually make the movie better than Smith could.
4) Will Smith Doesn’t Guarantee A Blockbuster
There is no doubt that Will Smith is the most bankable movie star out there today, however, in an era where stars don’t automatically equal box office success, that doesn’t mean as much as it used to. Yes, Smith has some giant blockbusters under his mighty belt, but some would argue that a few of those were going to be massive hits without or without Smith in the first place. Also, movies like Ali (maybe his best film) only made $58 million domestically, his last film Seven Pounds only made $68 million domestically. Neither of those films were blockbuster material anyway due to the type of movies that they were… but the point is just having Will Smith’s name on them didn’t propel them to blockbuster success. Stars just can’t do that anymore.
CONCLUSION
Please understand I’m NOT saying Will Smith shouldn’t be in Independence Day 2 and 3. I’m NOT saying that he shouldn’t get $50 million. I’m NOT saying he’s not a good actor. All I’m pointing out is that should Fox and Roland Emmerich choose to move forward without Will Smith (or Smith chooses not to do it), the projects will still work out just fine and will undoubtedly make monumental amounts of money. Just my two cents worth.
Like this editorial? Please share it around and follow us!
Even though not having Will Smith will make no difference financially for the films, it will be a shame because he was the one thing that made Independence Day watchable.
Posted by thejoker100ify | October 30, 2011, 11:21 pmAre you kidding me? Independence Day was easily the greatest movie of 1996, arguable the greatest movie of the 90s, possibly the century. You obviously have no clue what the hell you are talking about.
Posted by frikinpanda | November 1, 2011, 3:18 amtotally agree.ID4 along with Godzilla and maybe The Wild Wild West, truly greatest movies of all time. I only wish Will Smith was in every movie, his epic performance in MIB and Bad Boys makes me cry.
Posted by thirdwing | November 2, 2011, 6:28 pm@thirdwing I was just joking. My just wanted to see what kind of reaction I could pull.
Posted by frikinpanda | November 3, 2011, 7:01 pmWell done sir. I began to freak. Everybody knows the best movie of the 1996 is Striptease.
Posted by frikinpanda | November 4, 2011, 2:37 amHey! Batman and Robin was the best movie of the 90′s. C’mon now!
Posted by thejoker100ify | November 4, 2011, 8:36 pmHey John,
The two sequels will definitely make boatloads of cash, with out without Will Smith, I totally agree with you on that one. My question is given his demands, is 25 million per film worth the investment? Your fourth point says that he doesn’t necessarily guarantee a blockbuster, but you only brought up films that aren’t blockbuster films themselves. With out without Will Smith, those films wouldn’t have blockbusters. When you look at the 2006 film, “The Pursuit of Happiness” it took in $307,077,300. I think a HUGE reason it took in so much is attributed to Will Smith’s involvement. Also, when you look at his films that are expected to be blockbusters, i.e summer films, EVERYONE of them have been a huge success. ($585,349,010 for I Am Legend $624,386,746 for Hancock $347,234,916 for I, Robot, $441,818,803 for Men in Black II). Given that his demands are high, are they worth it? Will his involvement in these two films generate that much more income just by him being in it? My guess would be yes.
Posted by Zach | November 9, 2011, 1:09 amYikes, as you can see I didn’t read my post before submitting it haha sorry about that!
Posted by Zach | November 9, 2011, 1:11 am