Movie News and Reviews
- - - - - - - - -


Stallone Eyeballing Cliffhanger 2?

By Nix | February 17, 2008 (12:47 pm)

If this is true, this would be very sad. According to someone with an Internet connection (i.e. take this with a grain of salt, folks), Sylvester Stallone is ready to mine another one of characters — no, not Rocky or Rambo — but instead … Gabe Walker? Who the hell is Gabe Walker? He’s the hero of Stallone’s 1993 flick “Cliffhanger”, of course.

More (via):

SYLVESTER STALLONE is set to revive another old character as he continues his career resurgence. After receiving favourable reviews for bringing back Rocky and Rambo, the action man is planning to revisit rock climber Gabe Walker from 1993 film Cliffhanger, according to reports. Sony studio executives are in negotiations with Stallone to revive the character for The Dam.

There is no sourcing for the article above at all, so there you go. Who knows, maybe Variety or The Hollywood Reporter will announce it on Monday.

“Cliffhanger 2″, only this time set on a dam, to be called “The Dam”? I don’t know. Stallone is way too old to be hanging upside down on ropes…

Stallone Eyeballing Cliffhanger 2?

More: Cliffhanger 2 (2009) Movie

Related Articles

3 People Have Had Their Say » Add Your Comments | Discuss it in the Forum

B.L. Wooldridge on February 18, 2008

Stallone is too old to be hanging off cliffs or dams or whatever, but then again, Harrison Ford is too old to be swinging around on a bullwhip, too…

 
Nix on February 18, 2008

Maybe they can give him a kid and they can hang around together. Works for Indy, right?

 
LivingMovie on February 23, 2008

YEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!

Wait…..am I the only one who thinks this is a good idea?

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Subscribe to comments via email
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post