The black comedy Happy Death Day 2U, a year and a half later.
The sequel did well, but not as well as the first film. It only made $64 million against a $9 million budget. In spite of this, talk of another sequel has arisen and continues to be the topic of discussion among fans. However, not all fans think that a sequel is necessary. Here are the five reasons we don't need Happy Death Day 3 and the five reasons we do.
Don't: The Sequel Didn't Do Well
As previously mentioned, the sequel did not do as well as the first film, earning less money than the first film, yet having a higher budget. It received mixed reviews from critics, earning a 70% on Rotten Tomatoes but earning a 57 out of 100 from Metacritic and a 2.5 out of 5 stars from PostTrak.
While it is possible that the third film could do better than the second, since the second did not do as well, audiences may feel less inclined to see another Happy Death Day film in theaters, which would hurt its chances before it even had a chance to prove itself.
Do: More World-Building
The first film introduced the time loop but did not explain exactly why it was happening. The second sequel provided some answers as to why the time loop was occurring. Apparently, Carter's friend and roommate Ryan and his friends had created a quantum reactor nicknamed Sissy, which had started acting up and causing the time loops as well as rolling blackouts across their college campus.
It would be interesting to explore why only the people who are killed are aware that a time loop is occurring and the day has been repeated.
Don't: Tree Received Enough Character Development
In the first film, the plot followed a similar plot to Groundhog Day in which the main character Tree learned to be a better person through reliving the same day multiple times. The second film opened with Ryan repeating the next day over again but then it quickly switched back to Tree reliving the same day from the first film but learning a slightly different lesson.
If the third film were to take this approach yet again, it would be too repetitive. Also, Tree has already made substantial progress as a person and, while it is good for everyone to learn and grow, she does not need to do so through repeated time loops. After two runs of it, she deserves to grow naturally and normally like any other person.
Do: The Humor
Both films are horror comedies, ensuring that there are plenty of opportunities for comic relief. Both films utilize humor to portray Tree waking up and reliving the same events each morning in order to make scenes feel less repetitive and keep the audience interested.
Furthermore, the characters each have unique personalities and great chemistry, all of which make for interesting character dynamics and humorous moments from their interactions with each other. A third movie would provide plenty of opportunities for more hilarious moments whether it is through reliving events or through the characters' actions.
Don't: Shifting Genres
One of the biggest complaints about Happy Death Day 2U is that it went from being a straight horror comedy to being a science fiction film as well. Some people found this genre shift fine and thought it was well-justified but others wanted more of the slasher film aspect used in the first film.
The post-credit scene in the second film implied the possibility of yet another genre shift. While it would seem to still maintain elements of comedy, science fiction, and possibly horror, it may also utilize aspects of spy and action films as well. Since audiences did not like the change of genre in the second film, they are unlikely to like it in a third film.
Do: The Movies Are Fun
Happy Death Day and its sequel follow the same formula: Tree, or another character, waking up and reliving the same day repeatedly in order to learn an important life lesson. The films utilize comedy and horror in order to progress the plot and add on subplots of family dynamics and romance in order to develop the characters and again propel the plot.
These aspects make fun films, even if they are very similar. A third film would likely follow similar formulas, so audiences would know what to expect, meaning that they would know that they would enjoy the third film as much as they enjoyed the other two.
Don't: The Movies Already Used All Plausible Antagonists
The first film introduced multiple characters who could possibly be the killer including Tree's roommate Lori, the professor with whom Tree was having an affair, the professor's wife, and even a straight-up serial killer. The first film explored only one of these characters as the actual killer but then the second film explored the other three characters as well as briefly using a future version of Ryan as killers.
With all of these options already used and the post-credits scene in the sequel implying that Danielle will be the next to relive a day multiple times, the third film has run out of known characters as possible antagonists and killers, meaning that they would have to introduce new characters, which may be easier for audiences to pick out as the killer instead of having the killer's identity be a plot-twist.
Do: More Tree And Carter
Throughout the first film, Tree and Carter developed feelings for each other, even though Carter did not know that he was reliving the same day over and over again. In spite of Tree not liking Carter initially and viewing him as merely a drunken hook up even though nothing actually happened, part of Tree's character development was looking past first impressions and getting over herself in order to see that Carter is a good guy.
The second film showed Tree's feelings for Carter being tested with her feelings for him ultimately trumping any selfish tendencies she still had. The plots of each film show that Tree and Carter make a great couple and one thing going for a third installment would be seeing more of Tree and Carter as a couple.
Don't: The First Film Was Good On Its Own
In reality, the first film did not actually need a sequel. Even though the cause of the time loop remained a mystery, all of the other storylines were resolved. Furthermore, the remaining mystery of the time loop is one of the aspects that made the first film interesting.
The sequel explaining the cause of the time loop did not detract from either film, but it was not necessary. The first film could have been a stand-alone film but since it did so well, it received a sequel, as is the nature of Hollywood. The second film was also a good enough film to not need a sequel in spite of its post-credit scene.
Do: The Sequel's Post-Credit Scene
The sequel has a post-credit scene in which Tree, Carter, Ryan, Samar, and Dre are taken to a DARPA laboratory where they are enlisted to help government officials utilize Sissy (the reactor). The scene ends with Danielle waking up screaming, implying that she is the next person to relive a day multiple times.
The intentions of DARPA officials in the post-credits scene were not really touched upon, so it would be interesting to see a third film in which their intentions are explored. The third film could become a commentary on governments using science for selfish and dangerous means, similar to how many governments have done so in the past.
