Aint-it-cool.com is reporting that M. Night Shyamalan's long awaited sequel to "Unbreakable" will finally be heading to multiplexes. Just don't expect it to be called "Unbreakable 2", or have Bruce Willis, or actually be a sequel to "Unbreakable". Confused? Me too! It seems that the plot and villain for the proposed sequel to Shyamalan's Superhero flick will be used in an entirely different movie all together. According to the director:
"I cannibalized the idea for the sequel to 'Unbreakable' for one of the 'Night Chronicles,It was such a cool idea for a villain, and it was actually originally in the script for 'Unbreakable,' and it was too much," he said of his reasons for excising the element that was intended to become "Unbreakable 2." "There were too many villains, so I pulled this villain out and was like, 'I'll make this the second flick.I fleshed it out more and more, and thought, 'This could be a standalone movie,'"
"Night Chronicles" is a series of three films based on ideas from the mind of Shyamalan but written and directed by other filmmakers. The first of these movies is the soon to be released "Devil".
I'm not sure about everyone else but I think "Unbreakable" really should just stand alone. I think a sequel would just tarnish what I believe is one of the most under-rated "superhero" movies ever made. What say you?