I think the working title for The Muppets was actually The Greatest Muppet Movie Ever Made. Then they settled on The Muppets. I'm thinking The Muppets...Again could be the real title. Who knows at this point. It's not even shooting yet. We'll see.
I'm glad they didn't use that title. And in hindsight, I'm
really glad they didn't use any subtitle that suggested a massive comeback. Those titles were asking for trouble. Say what you will about the content of Looney Tunes Back in Action. That "we're back and ready to restart the franchise" statement was
asking for failure. We wouldn't have wanted to see that sort of misfortune happen, leaving the title to be an ironic statement or an annoying what could have been.
Disney titled the first film The Muppets for brand recognition. Same reason why Winnie the Pooh was only called Winnie the Pooh and didn't get a specific story title.
The ... Again bit is irreverent and quirky, though I don't know how it would be from a marketing standpoint.
They used that name along with "The cheapest Muppet Movie" when they were just planning it, but when they actually worked on it, it was "The Muppets".
Not sure how correct my theory is, but it really sounds like "Cheapest" was a place holder title (and possibly project) until they settled on the Segal/Stoller script. There was the intent to make a movie, but I wonder if they were going to go a different direction. There is no way that title would fit the project we got, since Cheapest is a high concept film that never went anywhere. Cheapest didn't have anything to do with the film at any angle, and while ... again is irreverent, Cheapest is esoterically irreverent to the point of confusing and scaring casual movie goers away.