From the business standpoint, it makes sense. Produce a film that requires little to no budget, but can still provide an immense box office result. It served well previously, the first film made over eighty million dollars, but the development cost for it was only three million. So, the sequel, Purge: Anarchy, was greenlit, with a budget of eleven million dollars. At the time of its release, the film received mediocre reception. A review from Rogerebert.com criticized the film, calling it "Just like its predecessor The Purge: Anarchy is so weak on a basic storytelling level that it makes you want to nitpick everything about it"; Notwithstanding the critical response, It grossed over one hundred million dollars at the box office. The film spawned …show more content…
It holds a poor rating of fourteen percent on rotten tomatoes, making it one of the worst movies of this year so far. The studio behind it, Blumhouse, made the film for only three million dollars, but it earned over 80 million, hence the inevitable sequel. If a movie falters financially, it is considered to be a bad investment; keep in mind, the quality of a product does not matter. This was the case for Dredd (2012). While no way a horror film, Dredd, in accordance to its critical scores, is an exceptional reincarnation of the comic book character, “Judge Dredd”. Post its launch, It has become a cult classic, and has garnered a respectable fan base. Despite requests for a sequel, it is safe to assume it will never happen; mainly due to the first film not earning its money back. This speaks to the fact the film production companies take actions based on the financial situation of a movie. If the audience is supporting films such as The Purge, Truth or Dare, or Paranormal Activity, the studio will continue to make sequels to those movies; and make films that are