I’ve heard that there may be one, and I thin the series would benefit from it.
What do you guys think?
I think the second one was a bit of a comedown
but it is nice to see julie delphy in films, tho I would be okay if she chose just to direct because she is a fair director.
All in all, I would say no
The second one was better than the first, but I don’t think there should be another, simply because the movie would no more be about chance meetings, and it might seem that all the charm would be lost. I mean, if anyone could do it, it’d be Linklater, but I hope he doesn’t try…
Before Sunset was the perfect companion piece to Before Sunrise. It conveyed everything it needed to, except perhaps a clear ending.
Well you may say that Julie’s "2 days in Paris " is the third one …
That “unclear” ending is one of the best endings I’ve ever seen.
No. Their appearence in Waking Life completes the trilogy.
What would the title be?Before Dusk?Before Twilight?
No, I think the two films make a beautiful pair and the ending is perfect for both the tone of the films and the gap in years between when they were made. Anything else would just cruelly squeeze some of the charm out.
Eh… no is probably the best answer, but if it did get made it would be a movie I really looked forward to seeing, so… whichever.
Hopefully not because it seemed finished already. Both films are magnificent and I truly believe that Before Sunset is one of the best sequels ever!
It could go on like – “impression, soleil levant”, or smth. Though I hope this won’t come true…
“No. Their appearence in Waking Life completes the trilogy.”
Wait, wasn’t Waking Life made before Before Sunset?
I love both films—and I agree with JR about the ending of Before Sunset.
My feeling about a third film hinges on the script. The script has to warrant a third film—if it’s less than great; if they’re just trying to force a third film, they should absolutely not make a third film. But they could come up with a great script/concept—and if they do I’d be open to a third film. I think coming up with a great concept/script is highly unlikely, though.
-Wait, wasn’t Waking Life made before Before Sunset?-
Yes . . . I just meant that a third appearence completes the (apparently) requisite trilogy . . . not in terms of story elements.
In my opinion, especially the ending is the reason there shouldn’t be third one! I’ve loved abrupt endings in romantic movies ever since Lost in Translation (and since, mumblecore) and continuing kind of ruins the magic.
But then again that was sort of the case after Before Sunrise aswell, so maybe..? Like Doinel said, I don’t think Linklater would fuck it up. Another question is if third part is really needed, I’d maybe rather see even slightly inferior “all-talk”-romance with fresh actors than (too) comfortable and familiar one dragging this story.
thought they should have stopped at one, young loves departing, making promises, perfect ending
Den, that is exactly what I thought when I first heard they were making a second film. But damn if they didn’t pull it off. I’d say the pair of films is better than either by itself.
So I guess I should grant that they could pull a hat trick. But this time I think the odds are really stacked against them since one of the core dynamics is the getting-to-know-you play. For a third go round, they would be too familiar to work this terrain so it would have to be a very different sort of film that would be more likely to clash with the first two.
“But damn if they didn’t pull it off. I’d say the pair of films is better than either by itself.”
Totally agree with this.
Yeah, I had real reservations going into the second one, but it worked. I don’t think there’s anywhere else to go with the story now, though.
After the first seemed like a second would ruin it, but it only made it more complete; the maturity and world-weariness of the characters a perfect counterpoint to the innocence of the first movie. It seems like a third would be pushing it, and it wouldn’t have that flipside to go to now.
Plus having to know what ended up happening after Before Sunset would be a bummer. Such a great ending. I saw Julie Delpy a couple days after I saw that movie at a farmer’s market in LA. She was buying flowers. I melted.
I don’t think Linklater, Delpy and Hawke would make another one unless they felt it could live up to the other two, so, I think I’d be excited to see another one. Before Sunset is one of the few brilliant sequels ever made. It helps when the imperative is artistic as opposed to commercial.
no it shouldnt be a sequal. because the 2nd one ended in a way like we can image. i like to think that he misses the flight and stays with her-although i know that it s not realistic- but i d like to think that way. also maybe it is more romantic that if they never get back together(if u consider love as pain) so if there is a 3rd movie, it’d have a real ending, which i dont really want.
Edit: Okay, I didn’t know quotes mess up your posts. I’m not typing all that up again so I’ll do the short version.
It’d be hard to justify a plot in a way that preserved the feel of the first two films. Let’s consider the possibilities.
A) They stayed together. Now there is no spontaneity.
B) They left, and get back together a second time. This is redundant with Before Sunset. Hey, you know how I thought about leaving my family for you last time? Well, now I’m considering it again! And anyway they probably exchanged contact information the second time, so they wouldn’t need chance to meet each other again.
C) They got together and realized they didn’t like each other that much when they had to see each other every day. This could be interesting but it’d make watching the first two films weird.
I think the ending of Before Sunset is the perfect ending for the characters.
They should make a third film that doesn’t represent reality, just a 2046 through the realm of possibilities past and future.
That’s D), by the way, ‘the one that actually involves artists at work, not merely predictable plotlines’
Would these films have been better if released in reverse chronology?
I think, if Linklater and co. decided to make a third film, it’d have to be… melancholy in some way for it to work. And I’m not just saying that because I’m a depressing bastard – for example, hypothetically, let’s say at the end of Before Sunset, Jesse decides to stay with Celine/leave his family/give their (Jesse and Celine’s) relationship a shot. I could see a third and final chapter taking place AFTER Jesse and Celine’s relationship ends. Hear me out – we’d see both characters lives’ individually, after their split – each reflecting on memories, mistakes, and all of the complications and consequences of Jesse’s decision to stay and the relationship that followed. And I think to stay true to the romance that was built throughout the first two films, their “break-up” wouldn’t be bitter, or due to a lack of love, but something else…
Of course this would color the previous films and change everyones’ perspectives on them. But something along these lines could be interesting… maybe.
That said, if they don’t make a third film, I’m fine with that. As some of you have said, the two films as they are compliment each other perfectly. But if they do, I’m there in a flutter of a heartbeat.
I’ve been to ciné debat with Julie Delpy and Julie said that Linklater and Ethan Hawke
are willing to make a third film but she has no time (having too many projects at the moment as a director:)) soo three of them are just working on a script and then they will see !