Divisive or not, Robert Eggers' The Witch has turned a tidy little profit for A24 (and, yeah, because the horror genre is known for pumping out sequels on the regular), which means it was probably only a matter of time before someone floated the idea of The Witch 2.
There's no telling if Eggers has been approached about the idea officially, but he has been approached casually (by the good folks at Entertainment Weekly), and his response pretty much seals the deal on the likelihood of such a thing ever happening:
I think I’m stealing the words from another director I cannot place, but if I wanted to know what happens after the last shot of the film, I would have made a longer movie.
Well said, and even better if he sticks to it. The Witch does not need a sequel, and I'm glad Eggers knows the appropriate end-point for the story he wanted to tell. That's important.
That sounds strange, but here's an anecdote: years ago, I caught an excellent horror film at SXSW. I interviewed the writer and director of the film the day after seeing it, and afterwards we stood around bullshitting for a few minutes, mostly about how much I'd enjoyed the film. Before I left, I said, "Just promise me one thing: promise me you won't make a sequel to this." The director and writer laughed, and then swore up and down that they had no intention of ever making a sequel to their film. "No, no," they told me, "This was designed to be a one-and-done thing."
That film went on to have at least one sequel. Maybe two.
In this case, I think Eggers probably means it. Besides, where would he find the time? Dude's already got a Nosferatu remake, a miniseries about the life of Rasputin, and a "medieval epic" called The Knight lined up. I suppose it's possible a sequel could be made without Eggers' involvement, but come on: who'd be that stupid*?
* = Please refer back to this pre-emptive insult when the inevitable occurs.