Home Posts filed under >Superman: The Man Of Steel
Speaking to the French press while promoting "Legend of the Guardians," new "Superman" director Zack Snyder may have spilled the beans on what the plot may entail. If a shaky French translation is to be trusted, we're going to be blessed with yet another origin story.
According to Snyder, "As I have already explained, the film will focus on the early days of Superman, so there will be no links with other films. This is not a remake then. Similarly, although I still cannot talk about the script—I can assure you that this new Superman will not be based on a comic book in particular.” This does defeat the theories that the new film would be based on pre-existing storylines like "Birthright," "All-Star Superman" or "That Peanut Butter Jar From Krypton Shan't Open."
So what does this tell us about the upcoming film? The most significant information has to be the suggestion of "early days," meaning yet another younger Superman, so those Jon Hamm rumors can be put to rest. We can count Brandon Routh out as well, since his version of the character was meant to be the well-traveled version of the first two films in the series. Beyond that? We dread the possibility of an origin story, one of the most tiring tropes this genre has inexplicably embraced. Do we need to know where Indiana Jones found that fedora? Where Charles Foster Kane bought that sled? How Stella originally obtained her groove before losing it, then subsequently retrieving it through the love of Taye Diggs? We do hope it's just iffy translation, and that Snyder's "vision" is able to accommodate a Superman that we haven't seen yet before, and not yet another version of a story everyone knows by heart now.
The Christopher Nolan-produced "Superman" reboot, due in 2012, finally has a director in the shape of "Watchmen" helmer Zack Snyder. No, we're not crazy about that either. But with the creative team, also including screenwriter David Goyer, in place, it means that the casting rumors for the film will kick off any day now. Freshly smug from being three-for-three with our "Spider-Man" picks from January (Ok, we figured MJ would be the lead, but still...), we turn our hand to Metropolis.
Clark Kent/Superman
Casting Superman isn’t easy and those who are going to be screaming big stars are off-the-mark (just look at “Spider-Man” for recent proof). Both iterations of the two “Superman” franchises that have hit the screens so far used unknowns. The Richard Donner version in the ‘70s and ‘80s used Christopher Reeve, who was vaguely familiar to some, but wasn’t anywhere near a household name, and the Bryan Singer version in 2006 plucked Brandon Routh out of obscurity and turned him into something of a star (he had done some film and TV work, but was virtually unknown until the moment he was announced). Superman comes with baggage, and the mere presence of the iconic cape and tights is enough to make someone a star, so our guess is they’re probably going to look at relative unknowns as well.
Everyone and their mothers has been flagging Jon Hamm for the role, but we think it's fairly unlikely -- they’re looking to make this into a trilogy, count on it, and at 40, he’s too old. You might as well cast Powers Boothe. Same for 37-year-old Ben Affleck (though he’s not a terrible choice). So our guess is it’s an unknown, or a relatively unknown actor between the ages of 25-35 and looks like he’s somewhere in between. Here’s five relatively “unknown” choices that could be a good starting point:
Matthew Bomer
Why He Could Do It: Something of a fan-favorite for the role, TV veteran Bomer, who appeared in the likes of "Tru Calling" and "Chuck," and currently toplines the USA Network hit "White Collar," was picked to play Clark Kent/Superman by Brett Ratner back in 2003, when the director was set to shoot J.J. Abrams' script, rumored to be called "Superman: Flyby." That project fell apart in favor of "Superman Returns," but with Bomer far more well-known than back then, could he pull a Pierce Brosnan and get a second shot at the role? He certainly looks the part, as he proved when he donned the cape in a series of Japanese Toyota adverts last year.
Why He Might Not: Between those ads and the Ratner version, there could be a sense that Bomer comes off as spoiled goods -- would Warners really want a guy who first donned the costume in a series of cheap-o car ads? Plus, with "White Collar" being renewed for a third season, and his contract likely to extend beyond that, scheduling may prove difficult. Plus, do we really trust Brett Ratner's taste enough to want this guy in the role?
Henry Cavill
Why He Could Do It: Now best known for Showtime's "The Tudors," the 27-year-old Brit has gained something of a reputation as a perpetual nearly-man in Hollywood. He was linked to the Caped Crusader for "Batman Begins," he was on the final shortlist of three, alongside Daniel Craig and Sam Worthington, for Bond in "Casino Royale," and was even Stephanie Meyer's pick for the sparkly vampire in "Twilight." Not to mention that, like Bomer, he's already been cast as Superman once before, in McG's take on the Abrams script, and was even linked to the role for George Miller's equally abandoned "Justice League" movie. He's about to flex his heroic muscles with lead roles in Tarsem's "Immortals" and in the Bruce Willis thriller "The Cold Light of Day;" could it be third time lucky for Cavill?
Why He Might Not: Aside from the same spoiled goods argument as Bomer, we're just not sure that Cavill's... well, any good. He was probably the weakest link on "The Tudors," and his big-screen roles, in "Stardust" and "Whatever Works," have been somewhat wooden. We're sure he's got a good performance in him, but we're not sure teaming with Zack Snyder on an FX-heavy feature is the way to do it. Plus, Superman is an iconic American figure in the way that a character like Batman or Wolverine isn't, and casting a Brit in the role might cause a fan outcry.
Matthew Goode
Why He Could Do It: While Snyder's generally refrained from re-using actors between his films, the cast of "Watchmen" contains a number of actors who could be strong contenders for the most iconic superhero role of them all. While Billy Crudup and Patrick Wilson may be too old now, 32-year-old Matthew Goode could still be a contender. Probably the best-known actor on this list, he's turned in some very strong performances in "A Single Man," "Match Point" and, particularly, Scott Frank's "The Lookout," and has an endearing and earnest quality befitting that of The Son of Jor-El.
Why He Might Not: We weren't particularly thrilled by his performance in "Watchmen" -- he took a bigger risk with his character than most of the ensemble, with some interesting moments, but seemed miscast. Would he really be more successful as another Adonis-like figure, one without the moral ambiguities that Goode lends to his best work? Furthermore, Goode seems perhaps a little slight in build to take on the barrel-chested Kryptonian -- sure, the personal trainers can do their work, but he still strikes us as not quite having the right look. Plus, as another Brit, so he may meet the same kind of fanboy resistance as Cavill (although, with Nolan in the producer's chair, this may not be such a problem)
James Wolk
Why He Could Do It: With a script from "The Beaver" writer Kyle Killen, a pilot directed by future "Spider-Man" helmer Marc Webb and the kind of glowing reviews that every TV show prays for, Fox placed con-man drama "Lone Star" as their great white hope for the new TV season. Unfortunately, no one watched it, and it was canceled after two episodes, but critics and the two dozen audience members could agree at least that a star had been born in the shape of lead James Wolk. Plucked from nowhere to top-line the show, the actor turned in a great performance, and should at least be assured that plenty of offers will be coming his way in the future. More importantly for our purposes, he looks rather like a younger Jon Hamm, with the square jaw and all-American appeal that would seem to make him a perfect fit for Superman. He's only 25, the youngest name on this list, meaning he'd work for the rumored "Superman's Year Out" logline, and have the longevity for a potential franchise, but he also projects a maturity beyond his years.
Why He Might Not: There aren't actually a lot of negatives, to be honest; if we were Snyder, Wolk would be the first guy we'd meet with. The biggest hurdle would seem to be the leap between the bigamous, morally conflicted con-man in "Lone Star," and the defender of truth, justice and the American way. He's also the least well-known name on the list, which might make the studio a little nervous, but the ability for unknowns to carry superhero movies is well-established at this point.
Anderson Davis/Anyone Off The Street/An Unknown
Why They Could Do It: All Brandon Routh had on his CV before he was cast was a handful of guest appearances on TV shows like "Cold Case" and "Gilmore Girls," and Christopher Reeve was primarily a theater actor before he was picked. So who's to say that Snyder and Nolan won't try the same? There will be hundreds of actors that look the part ready to try out, and it's entirely possible that one of them could turn out to be a gem, able to embody Superman and his alter ego better than anyone we've yet seen? Someone like model Anderson Davis, who came up in our internal discussions as having the right look for the role, could well turn out to have hidden acting talents.
Why They Might Not: Well, the recent history of casting superhero movies suggests that it'll turn out to be someone whose name at least rings a bell -- even if a studio doesn't go for a household name (and really, the last time they did was Nic Cage in "Ghost Rider" — even Ryan Reynolds has become exponentially more famous since he was cast in "Green Lantern"), they're more likely to go for an actor on the verge, rather than some hick straight off the bus. But then, maybe a hick straight off the bus is what the role needs?
Because We Know You're Going To Ask: Brandon Routh
Why They Could Do It: Regardless of what you thought of "Superman Returns," it's hard to deny that Bryan Singer triumphed when he cast Brandon Routh as the man in tights. Goofy when he needed to be, heroic when he had to be, the then-unknown was more or less perfect in the role, even if Bryan Singer's valentine to Richard Donner wasn't as good as its star deserved. Routh was essentially absent for a few years, but his turn in "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" has brought him back into the limelight, and he's more than deserving of a second crack at the whip.
Why They Might Not: Look, we thought Routh was great, but it simply isn't going to happen. Director Zack Snyder's already said as much, and everyone concerned is going to want a clean break with Singer's film, particularly as the Nolan/Goyer/Snyder take is likely to be very different from "Superman Returns." It's a tough break for Routh, but his career resurgence is on its way as it is, so we're sure he won't sweat it too much.
Honorable Mentions: Scott Porter of TV's "Friday Night Lights" and "Caprica," is another actor who was once cast in the role -- in George Miller's aborted "Justice League" movie, and might be a contender this time out. Bigger names like Ben Affleck or Jake Gyllenhaal would certainly be possible, but Affleck's already turned down the director's chair for the film, and is too old at this point anyway, while Gyllenhaal's one brush with tentpole FX flicks, "Prince of Persia," was probably enough to put him, and us, off for life. Sam Worthington's name is likely to come up somewhere, but we'd be very surprised if he took it, while Joel Edgerton, the thinking man's Worthington, is probably on the older side of the spectrum, and might suffer from being an Australian. Henry Cavill's co-star in "Immortals," Luke Evans ("Tamara Drewe"), has the right square-jawed look, but still somewhat anonymous. John Krasinski was close to landing "Captain America," but the fanboy outcry there probably put off anyone else from thinking of casting him in a superhero role, while Lee Pace is another plausible name from TV, although he doesn't quite look right, again being a little skinny for the part. Finally, Armie Hammer's star is on the rise after "The Social Network," and has the superhero look down pat (he was going to be Batman in "Justice League"), but we're not sure he could pull of the Clark Kent side of the character.
Lois Lane
Margot Kidder was an iconic Lois Lane, sure,but, Kate Bosworth proved that practically any actress in a brown wig can step into the role (apologies to Bosworth, but the thinly drawn character was one of the Achilles' heels of the film). At the same time, Lois has always been a little more independent-minded than the Mary-Jane Watsons of the world, so it needs to be someone with a little backbone. Of course this is all assuming that Nolan and Snyder aren't going down the "Spider-Man" reboot path, and making the character's first love, Lana Lang, the female lead...
Rebecca Hall
Why She Could Do It: At this stage, Rebecca Hall has proven she can handle anything thrown her way, from the tragic wife of a stage magician in "The Prestige" to neurotic Woody Allen stand-in in "Vicki Cristina Barcelona." Nolan's obviously worked with her before on the former, which could give her a leg up, and she's at about the right level of fame to consider taking the role -- not famous enough that she's top-lining movies, but well known enough to get enough magazine coverage etc. And with the success of "The Town," her star's risen in recent months, and Warners may be keen to continue the relationship from that film.
Why She Might Not: Hall's specialized in rather thoughtful, introverted characters to date, and Lois Lane's a much bigger, brasher character than we're used to from her. That's not to say she's not up to the task, but she may not be the filmmakers' first thought for the role. She's also perhaps too much of a serious actress to take the role -- she tends to jump between prestige pictures, indies and theater work, and hasn't really taken a strict paycheck role to date. Plus, from his work to date, she doesn't quite fit the Zack Snyder ideal of womanhood...
Rachel McAdams
Why She Could Do It: Classy and adorable, McAdams has the face of the All-American journalist (although, she is Canadian). In fact, her role as a blogger-turned-reporter in "State of Play" almost felt like an audition for Lois, and the upcoming "Morning Glory" isn't a world away. She's got tentpole experience from "Sherlock Holmes," and can do dame-in-peril with her eyes closed, as she proved in "Red Eye." She's a pretty bright star, and should certainly be high on any list for the character.
Why She Might Not: Last time around, McAdams might well have been a contender, but at this stage, she might well be too big a star -- she's able to take even the troubled likes of "The Time Traveler's Wife" to a decent gross, and we're expecting "Morning Glory" to be a pretty big sleeper hit this season. Casting her opposite an unknown Clark Kent risks overshadowing the lead, and she may have no desire to take a role that, while spunkier than most superhero love interests, still doesn't quite compare to filming with Terence Malick.
Lizzy Caplan
Why She Could Do It: If Snyder and Nolan are looking for someone who can capture the look and quick wit of Margo Kidder -- the Lois in the Richard Donner movies -- they could do a lot worse than looking toward Lizzy Caplan. The actress, best known for roles in "True Blood," "Party Down" and "Cloverfield," has more than enough talent for the role, her star's on the rise (with Danny Boyle's "127 Hours" on the way, along with her first big-screen lead in "Queens of Country") and she could provide a distinctive, quirky stamp on the character that would prevent it from turning out like Kate Bosworth's bland take in "Superman Returns."
Why She Might Not: Caplan's currently developing an HBO series with Adam McKay, which may prove to be more tempting, and she's also quite picky with her roles -- pulling out of the CBS show "Mad Love" caused it to be heavily delayed. Plus, she might prove a little too quirky for Snyder & co.
Emily Blunt
Why She Could Do It: Blunt's star is ever-rising, and she was the first choice for Black Widow in "Iron Man 2," only being prevented from taking it through a contractual problem with 20th Century Fox. She's had action and effects experience of late, with "The Wolf Man" and next year's "Looper," and would bring glamor, nobility and an impressive range to the part.
Why She Might Not: Somehow, we don't quite see this one. We adore Blunt as much as the next man, but she specializes in steely-yet-vulnerable: we can see her barely giving Clark Kent the time of day, but we can't quite see her swooning over Superman. It just doesn't seem that the role would play to Blunt's strengths.
Kate Mara
Why She Could Do It: Elder sister of "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" star Rooney Mara, Kate's worked solidly since breaking out in "Brokeback Mountain," in "Shooter," "We Are Marshall" and, in particular, her excellent performance in Brad Anderson's "Transsiberian." She's appropriately strong-willed, but with a neat underlying sense of mischief to her, and she's unlikely to be too expensive or unavailable.
Why She Might Not: For one thing, it could be argued that she resembles Kate Bosworth a little too much. Probably the first time anybody's ever said that was a bad thing. And if Snyder and Nolan can persuade a bigger name like Blunt or Natalie Portman to consider the role, Mara may seem less appealing. Plus, having appeared briefly in "Iron Man 2," she's popped up in a rival superhero franchise, but that's unlikely to be a problem. Otherwise, she's a solid choice.
Elizabeth Banks
Why She Could Do It: Having established herself as an invaluable comic presence in "Wet Hot American Summer," "Role Models" and "30 Rock," Banks is expanding her dramatic range at the moment with appearances in Paul Haggis' "The Next Three Days" and "Man On A Ledge." As such, she's more than demonstrated the required range for Lois, and would be an appropriately feisty sparring partner for anything that the film could throw at her.
Why She Might Not: Simply, and awfully, the problem here is age. Banks would be perfect opposite a Jon Hamm or a Ben Affleck, but at 36, would seem odd opposite a Cavill or a Wolk. Plus, she cropped up, albeit briefly, in all three of Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man" films, which probably won't help her cause.
Honorable Mentions: Natalie Portman's name has already been mentioned in connection with the role, and, while it's unlikely she'll take it (particularly with a similar role in "Thor" on the way), it's a good indication of where Warners may be heading. Anne Hathaway's also a good choice for the part, but probably too A-list for the role at this stage. Michelle Monaghan, like Banks, would be a sterling choice, but perhaps too old, while Jenna Fischer, Linda Cardellini, Kristen Bell and Sophia Bush all came up in our discussions, and could all pull it off easily. Two of our favorite suggestions came from the cast of "Parks and Recreation;" Rashida Jones, who, while not fitting the traditional view of Lois, would smash the part, and Aubrey Plaza, who, if she demonstrates a little more range than she's been able to date, could be a terrific, albeit offbeat pick. Neither will happen, but we sort of wish they would.
Jimmy Olsen
As the audience surrogate, the Daily Planet investigative reporter/ photographer needs to be played by someone likable who can occasionally tug on our heart strings, and often serve as comic relief, and moral compass. It's likely to be someone in their early 20s, too.
Jesse Eisenberg
Quirky and self-deprecating, Eisenberg would be a great pick, and one who could certainly benefit from a tentpole role like this one. And, even a year ago, we'd have said he'd be a shoe in. But, having shown new depths to his persona in "The Social Network," becoming a likely Oscar nominee in the process, we can't imagine that the sidekick role holds much appeal for the actor at this point.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Again, Gordon-Levitt's another actor who, a year or two ago, would have been a good pick for Superman's most loyal pal. But with the one-two punch of "(500) Days of Summer" and "Inception," he's graduated to full-on leading man, and despite the pre-existing relationship with Nolan, there's not a snowball's chance in hell he'd take on a role like this. Batman villain? Maybe. Superman's sidekick? Not in a million years.
Elijah Wood
Still struggling to escape the shadow of "The Lord of the Rings," acting's been on the back burner for Wood of late, preferring to focus on his record label. But if he wanted a third act to his career, there could be few better ways of doing it than with a supporting role like this one. Wood's still not yet 30 and looks younger, and could be a strong pick: not our first choice, certainly, but how many films get their first choice for everyone? And he couldn't be as bad as Sam Huntington in "Superman Returns"
Anton Yelchin
Kyle Reese in "Terminator Salvation." Pavel Chekhov in "Star Trek." Add Jimmy Olsen to Yelchin’s resume and he officially has the epic genre film hat trick. He's versatile, quirky, and charismatic -- in fact, possibly too charismatic. Plus, the "Star Trek" sequel, scheduled for release close to the "Superman" film, probably makes this one unlikely.
Donald Glover
So yeah, we know there was never any chance of rising comedy star Glover landing "Spider-Man," but a supporting role like Olsen? Sure. His comic chops are unquestionable, and it'd again signal that this wasn't a film as rooted in the past as "Superman Returns" -- even if the inevitable backlash from racist, mouth-breathing fanboys would need to be weathered. And if not Glover, what about his "Community" co-star Danny Pudi?
Zod
Kneel before Zod? More like kneel before Terence Stamp, who flat out owned the role of the megalomaniacal Kryptonian in Richard Donner’s "Superman 2." Zod calls for a degree of arrogance and unsympathetic cruelty that challenges Superman’s idealistic integrity.
Tom Hardy
Props to Movieline for picking Hardy out as a contender -- it's a great call. Hardy's role in "Inception" woke mainstream moviegoers up to what we've known for a while; Hardy's a force to be reckoned with. He could pull off an eccentric, menacing Zod with his eyes closed: the only question is, could he go from playing "Mad Max" to the villain in another tentpole. Will his schedule even allow it? "Fury Road" is meant to be filming for most of next year.
Ralph Fiennes
Voldemort, anyone? Fiennes carries himself with the regal quality necessary for the role of Zod: one that also needs a mix of dignity, elitism and lunacy. We all know that Fiennes can play a villain in his sleep -- the main problem being, as anyone who saw "Clash of the Titans" will attest to, that he may well have been asleep when he shot that one. Probably a solid pick, but there are more imaginative ones out there.
Karl Urban
Potentially the most intense of our choices, Urban's pulled off some solid villainy -- his assassin in "The Bourne Supremacy" could be a good model for Zod. But Urban could be too intense, and weigh the character down -- Zod's nature is that of a man whose anger resides under the surface, with a sort of incredulity at those who would dare question him. He's also gone campy, as in the upcoming "Priest," which certainly isn't the route we'd want either. More importantly, Urban is franchised up to the eyeballs at this point, with "Star Trek 2" and, potentially, sequels to next year's "Dredd" in the pipeline.
Jude Law
Once reportedly cast as Superman against Colin Farrell's Caped Crusader in Wolfgang Petersen's "Batman Vs. Superman" (perhaps one of the dumbest projects ever to start development) Law, now a decade older, seems rather more suited to Zod. He's got the action chops, as "Repo Men" and "Sherlock Holmes" have proved recently, and could certainly have fun with the role, but we suspect that he has projects he'd find more interesting.
Jason Isaacs
Another perennial bad guy, Isaacs has turned in some truly diabolical villains in the likes of "The Patriot," "Peter Pan," "Harry Potter" and, most recently, "Green Zone," without ever feeling as overexposed as a Gary Oldman or a Mark Strong. Capable of flamboyance and malevolence in the same breath, he'd be a welcome Zod.
Perry White
Usually known as the epitome of a balanced editor with integrity, White isn’t afraid to call out his staffers but also knows when to draw the line. Snyder could go many ways with White’s story, choosing to make him a father figure to Clark Kent or a glory hungry mogul who threatens to expose the identity of Superman. It would be intriguing to see if Snyder uses The Daily Planet as an allegory for media corruption in the ever-degrading subculture of journalism. As that wouldn't involve robot dragons fighting Nazi gladiators in slow motion, we suspect not.
Chris Cooper
Despite his 2003 Oscar win for "Adaptation," Cooper is still perennially underrated, but he'd be a fascinating choice for Clark & Lois's editor, and a good way to distinguish the character from J.K. Simmon's unforgettable J. Jonah Jameson in "Spider-Man" -- one of the problems that Frank Langella suffered from in "Superman Returns." Whether he'd have any interest is another matter -- he's taken a handful of paycheck roles, but not many.
Dustin Hoffman
Ok, bear with us. While his reputation as a Method actor still persists, Hoffman's entered a more easygoing phase of his career, and he's more likely to take a role like this than ever before. Richard Donner used White as comic relief, and Hoffman would keep it dry, but undoubtedly bring a kind of manic, acerbic wit.
Hugh Laurie
Laurie was originally cast as White in "Superman Returns," but had to drop out due to his commitments to "House." With that show currently entering what feels like its 500th season, maybe the time's come for Laurie to take another stab -- his withering put-downs from that show could be perfect for the character. But the same scheduling conflicts may be an issue, and again, Snyder and Nolan may want to make a break from Singer's vision.
John Slattery
With everyone keen that Jon Hamm take on the role, it got us thinking: what about Roger Sterling as newspaper editor? Slattery's got a strong look for the character, and his scene-stealing turn in "Iron Man 2" demonstrated he can hold his own among the effects. Unfortunately, that role may put him out of contention here, due to the old Marvel/DC divide.
Frank Langella
While Langella wasn't perfect in "Superman Returns," we'd blame the film's overall vision for that one, rather than anything else; the actor was heaps of fun in the part. Gaining an Oscar nomination in the meantime, he's only gotten more prestigious in the intervening years. But again, the chances of any continuity between the two films are slim-to-none. — Adam Sweeney & Oliver Lyttelton
Consider this a weekly look at the biggest projects of the week, and whether they should be crowding multiplexes or not. If we had our way, everything would be French, in black and white, with Asia Argento smoking cigarettes, naked, but we often try to look at matters in the eyes of the major studios. They have feelings too, you know.
"Alien" Prequel
Who’s Behind It?: 20th
Century Fox, director Ridley Scott, screenwriters Damon Lindelof and Jon Spaights.
What Is It?: Reportedly, the intentions of Scott are to take the series back to its roots, specifically the haunted original film that introduced the murderous xenomorphs as a parasitic alien race emerging from the shadows to kill. This planned two-film prequel, which deals with the Weyland-Yutani corporation developing terraforming technology, would also primarily showcase what happened to the spacecraft explored by Ellen Ripley and company in the first film, particularly the deceased Space Jockey, whose remains have been speculated on by a legion of fans.
Why Should This Be Made?: “Alien” is a popular series that has spanned six movies and several videogame, comic book and novel tie-ins. It was only a matter of time before Fox got the ball rolling on another film in the franchise, so why not take a chance with Ridley Scott? Scott’s had a number of hits since “Alien,” but most feel that as the architect of the franchise, he made the best “Alien” film yet. Furthermore, there is iconic resonance of the Xenomorph creatures, one of the few genuine monster movie icons in the last forty years. While later films in the series emphasized the science fiction trappings of the story, Scott’s original film was something of an outer space slasher, so it’s clear someone needed to restore the creature to its monstrous origins before it lost relevance, giving the franchise a new lease on life and re-igniting interest in the earlier films as catalog titles.
Why Shouldn’t It Be Made?: Scott has apparently suggested a $250 million budget would be necessary for these films. While it remains unclear if he was suggesting $250 million for each film or $125 per, that’s still a very steep price. None of the “Alien” films have even crossed $100 million domestic ("Alien Vs. Predator" is the biggest worldwide moneymaker at $172 million) so if the two films, in total, carried a quarter of a billion price tag on production alone, they would most assuredly have to make $600-$800 million worldwide for a theatrical profit. If they cost $250 million each, then a billion dollar gross is the starting point. That is, of course, if the first one doesn’t flop, turning the second film into an albatross. Of course, being a franchise, the value will lie in ancillaries, but how many times can you re-release “Alien Resurrection” on Blu-Ray? Scott’s also demanding an R-rating, and the list of $600 million-grossing R-rated movies isn’t very big - just "The Matrix Reloaded" and "The Passion of the Christ."
Scott also isn’t the filmmaker he used to be, alternating between dull, expensive epics with varying degrees of financial success. His name doesn’t have the cachet it did ten years ago when “Gladiator” won Best Picture, and he’s coming off “Robin Hood,” the most successful (and expensive) of Universal’s recent expenditures, and only because it barely eked out a profit, and only because Europe loves their period epics, as domestic grosses reflected a willing but apathetic core audience. His talk about returning to the roots of the first film sound promising until you realize the budget he’s demanding suggests a film that would be nothing like the claustrophobic original.
And finally, it’s a prequel. Of course, Fox is a business, and they want to keep revitalizing this brand name every few years, but after two “Alien Vs. Predator” movies, this brand is damaged goods. It would take a lot of marketing power to get people into the theaters to see this monster again, and even then, why? Why must we know exactly what happened with the Space Jockey? That moment in “Alien” carries power because of the horrifying fates we imagined the crew suffered at the hands of their attackers, and it’s already been diluted by all the sequels. Two prequel films would render it irrelevant.
Similar Films: Fox knew the “Predator” franchise was damaged by its team-ups with the “Alien” characters, so they were wise to allow Robert Rodriguez to shepherd the title back to the screen in a film that was part sequel, part remake, and part reboot. “Predators” was cheap, and released in the middle of summer, it grossed $52 million domestically, $125 worldwide.
Final Word: Fox was developing this project under the aegis of frosh director Carl Erik Rinsch, but once they decided to take a shot at making something a little bigger, they requested Scott take the helm. He’s since requested a two-film commitment at that hefty budget, which lends some doubt as to whether the project will happen. It’s possible this could become a co-production between Fox and another heavy hitter, or that a super-producer (James Cameron?) might lend the project some extra heat. Or it’s possible Scott doesn’t actually want to make the movie, and is torpedoing the studio efforts with unrealistic demands. Whatever the case, it’s a dubious proposition to make tent pole blockbusters at ever-unreliable Fox, especially if the budget is that out-of-control. They had the right idea in “Predators,” which was to work fast and cheap, and hope that a strong DVD showing paves the way for a bigger sequel. At this point, Ridley Scott is not the filmmaker needed to examine the possibility that previous “Alien” films weren’t galactic blockbusters because of too-small budgets.
Should It Be Made?: No.
Superman: The Man Of Steel
Who’s Behind It?: Wa
rner Bros., director Zack Snyder, producer Chris Nolan, writer David Goyer
What Is It?: Warner Bros.’ sixth big screen attempt at bringing Superman to the masses, though the plot is being kept under wraps. It is said to be a reboot of the franchise, so no attachment to previous titles is expected, though it will feature the Man of Steel in combat with Kryptonian super villain Zod, and may have a strong Clark Kent angle.
Why Should This Be Made?: Warner Bros. and DC Comics are smarting at their failure to launch films based on their stable of comic characters while Marvel Films flourishes, but they still have a large pool of marketable entites to utilize. And there’s none bigger on either side than Superman, a pop icon like no other who hasn’t shined on the big screen since “Superman II” in the early eighties. Superman is the most instantly recognizable superhero available, with an unforgettable look and an origin story that most know by heart. There is no ancillary product with a big red “S” that you can’t sell. Should be a slam dunk, right?
Warner Bros. trusted Bryan Singer on “Superman Returns” and were burned by his stately, mannered take on the character that valued reverence and thematic knottiness to crowd-pleasing action sequences and high drama. They made the safe choice in allowing the next Superman project to reach the screen under Nolan, who has provided the architecture for the current onscreen DC universe with “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight.” He skewed conservatively as well by involving Snyder, who adapted two other comic properties for the WB thus far, with mixed but mostly positive success.
Furthermore, despite the negative reputation of “Superman Returns,” it grossed $400 million worldwide. Regardless of profit, when a property brings in that level of cash, its foolish to ignore the earning potential of the brand name. Audiences clearly have a hunger for costumed adventurers, and Superman’s image has survived partly due to the characters’ malleability. The Last Son Of Krypton means something different to everyone, so there’s reason to believe Snyder and Nolan’s vision will differ greatly from the Man of Steel brought to us by Singer or director Richard Donner.
Why Shouldn’t It Be Made?: As conservative as this new approach may be, cost still factors in. A “Superman” film isn’t going to have less than a $200 million production budget, so you’re looking at a necessary worldwide number of $600 million to break even right off the bat. This would mean the new “Superman” film would have to be much bigger than the previous one, and while money talks, “Superman Returns" tepid DVD showing suggests a franchise picture that no one truly liked, furthering the chasm between the appeal of the big blue boy scout and the more risqué, socially relevant adventures of Iron Man and the X-Men. This means a gargantuan marketing budget to get audiences burned six years ago back into the theater.
There’s also the possible torpedoing of D.C.’s cross-pollination plans. Seeing Marvel’s intentions for “The Avengers” have made the company eager to use their characters to populate each others’ universes, in essence using Superman to sell the Flash, using the Flash to sell Wonder Woman, and so on. Nolan has unfortunately gone on record saying that he dislikes this blueprint, and would prefer to have both Batman and Superman exist in completely isolated universes. While DC is adding a few outer-universe references in next summer’s “Green Lantern,” it would be much easier to tie an already-established heavy hitter like Supes or Batman into the larger superhero world. But Nolan already killed the George Miller “Justice League” movie that was set to go in front of cameras on the eve of the writer’s strike, and that was pre-“Inception.”
And why Nolan’s judgment need not be questioned previously, Zack Snyder? The overeager hitmaker has reflected a dullard’s mindset in his theatrical pictures thus far, emphasizing empty thrills over thematic intent. In adapting “300” and “Watchmen,” he created empty, meaningless dioramas posing as motion pictures, and while DVD numbers on the latter are hard to find, the film needed to do gangbusters business to compensate for a mediocre theatrical showing. Snyder’s gone on record about being offered the director’s chair for “Superman” and turning it down, so accepting it so quickly after the first weekend failure of his animated “Legend of the Guardians” speaks volumes about his next picture, “Sucker Punch.”
Similar Films: Universal and Marvel tried to reboot the “Hulk” franchise after the dismal showing of 2003’s “Hulk,” and while 2008’s “The Incredible Hulk” grossed a similar amount ($263 million over $245 worldwide), there was strong skepticism over presenting a different version of the character with another actor. While “Incredible” was a popular catalog title, Marvel has no plans for a third “Hulk” adventure (we'd be hard-pressed to believe what they've told Mark Ruffalo), opting to recast again for the upcoming “Avengers” film.
Final Word: It’s unce
rtain if the development on the new “Superman” picture has anything to do with the lawsuit against the WB regarding ownership rights of the character. They spent time in court justifying their treatment and marginalization of the character on film, so turning around and making another big budget adventure is suspicious. They might be required to get a film in theaters by 2012 to retain the character, as per the lawsuit’s requirements, and are likely putting their best foot forward. Ideally, the best financial decision would have been to agree upon a massive settlement and joint ownership, but either that wasn’t in the cards and/or the studio realized they could make billions of dollars in profit by relaunching a “Superman” franchise. Even if the new film is a break-even, a quality picture that audiences like goes a long way towards guaranteeing the longevity of the character in future installments. Snyder on his own doesn’t seem to be the right fit for that plan, but with Nolan exerting strong creative control, there’s reason to believe this is a step in the right direction.
Should This Be Made?: Yes.
Zack Snyder is directing "Superman." Not Matt Reeves or Duncan Jones. Zack Snyder. And we're going to have to start to get used to that. We've gone through shock, anger and denial, so acceptance can only be a matter of time, right? We mean, Warner Bros. and producer Christopher Nolan have had some time to pick the right guy, and some heavy hitters, from Robert Zemeckis to Darren Aronofsky, were in the mix. So, despite our dislike for Snyder's body of work (and to be fair, we enjoyed "Dawn of the Dead" very much), he must have come in with a pitch that blew everyone away, a take on the film that'll live up to Nolan's Batman movies. Right?
Maybe not. Vulture is reporting that Snyder wasn't Warner's first choice for the gig -- as previously reported, Ben Affleck turned it down, and possibly others. The issue, once again, is that the rights revert to the estates of the character's creators in 2013, and a film has to be in production by next year or the studio could face more lawsuits so time was of the essence in terms of appointing a helmer. "Knowledgeable insiders" say that David Goyer's script was "rushed" and "is still a bit of a mess," and that Warner Bros. wanted someone who would get the film done on time, rather than an auteur, someone like Aronofsky (who was apparently pursuing the project), who would wait for the script to be right.
This isn't exactly a huge validation of the pick of Snyder, and even he is said to have confided that the script needs work. To be fair, with Snyder finishing up "Sucker Punch" until the spring, the film likely won't shoot before next summer, so there's still time to get it right, but the short time frame and the Snyder/Goyer combo isn't filling us with confidence.
And what of that script? Details are still thin on exactly what the Man of Steel will be up to, but Vulture suggest that the story, by Goyer and Jonathan Nolan, features the hero as "a journalist traveling the world trying to decide if he should, in fact, even become Superman;" a sort of "Eat, Pray, Leap Tall Buildings In A Single Bound," if you will.
Vulture's a great site, and very rarely not on the money, but some of this doesn't quite add up. The rumor on Monday that General Zod would be the villain, for instance, doesn't gel with the logline, nor the pick of Snyder for what sounds like a rather meditative take on the character -- you don't hire the director of "300" for "Superman Takes A Year Off After College To Work Out What He Really Wants To Do With His Life And Meets Some, Like, Really Amazing People On A Beach In Goa."
Our best guess is that Goyer and Nolan have essentially recycled the structure of "Batman Begins" -- a jet-setting first act, with our hero traveling the world to work out whether humanity is worth protecting -- before returning to Metropolis for action-packed second and third acts. Drew McWeeny at HitFix hints at a possible immigration subtext (one that sounds a little reactionary, if we're being honest, although with some of the political moments in "The Dark Knight," that wouldn't be a huge surprise), but it's very unclear how much of a reality this might be. We're still a few years away from seeing it on the big screen, and things may even change between now and the start of filming, but we're sure more details will emerge sooner rather than later.
>>> First 'Superman' Rumors Aren't Good: Zack Snyder Not WB's First Choice? David Goyer's Script A Mess? >>>
Ok, for better or worse, Zack Snyder is your new "Superman" director and the trades have emerged with their own details that shed a bit more light on the project.
The biggest piece of news comes from Variety, who spoke to Snyder and their report says the new director said it's "unlikely" that "Superman Returns" actor Brandon Routh will return for the lead role of Superman and Clark Kent. Suffice to say that's likely truth and diplomatic talk for "we're looking in another direction."
This will be a big disappointment for "Routh as Superman" fans who are a small, but vocal group (we'll admit, we liked the guy, but we're also not opposed to someone new as long as the choice doesn't make us cringe).
As we mentioned briefly, it appears that a villain has been found. Though early reports pegged Brainiac (and Luthor) in an "action-packed" Superman film, THR says that apparently General Zod from Richard Donner's "Superman II" (as played by the venerable Terence Stamp) is rumored to be part of the David S. Goyer-penned screenplay.
As for Christopher Nolan's godfathering role in all this? Snyder tells Variety. "He provides that extra bit of wisdom to a process that sometimes lacks it. It's the best situation we could be in for this character. It's still early in the process but I will say that the story that Chris and David have laid out is pretty awesome," he said.
Many have noted, including us, that Superman is traditionally a well-adjusted character so he's difficult to portray on the screen with a lot of psychological flaws; the perfect Christopher Reeves-type Superman being pretty dull these days and Snyder acknowledged this. "Chris and David have given this the shape with a great story. It's a hard character to crack,” he told Hero Complex.
>>> Brandon Routh Unlikely To Play 'Superman' Again Says Zack Snyder; General Zod Rumored To Be New Villain >>>
At this point, what director isn't interested in Warner Bros. gestating "Superman: Man Of Steel"? From new kids on the block like Matt Reeves to auteurs like Darren Aronofsky, it appears the Christopher Nolan-godfathered film is trying everyone in Hollywood on for size.
Buried in Deadline's exclusive on a new live action Robert Zemeckis project, the site reveals the director "has lately been rumored to be kicking the tires on such live action projects as Superman." The name is a bit of surprise considering Zemeckis has been following his motion capture muse for the last ten years with "Beowulf," "A Christmas Carol" and "The Polar Express" and it's been two decades since his last major live action tentpole film, "Back To The Future III." But he definitely knows his way around effects, and is a respected director, so it's not entirely out of the question (and he's a much better choice than say, Tony Scott).
As for the live-action project, his first since 2000's "Cast Away," Zemeckis is attached to produce and possibly direct a pitch picked up by Warner Bros. called "Timeless" by Mike Thompson. Thompson, who wrote "Dragonfly" and "Love Happens," is best known in Hollywood circles for teaming with Brandon Camp and earning a big day for their script "Steinbeck's Big Day." The film gained heat when Tom Cruise showed interest in the project, and the duo ended up earning millions thanks to play or pay deals when it fell apart. No word yet on the plot details for "Timeless" except that it's a time travel film.
We presume with Zemeckis eyeing other projects that his "Yellow Submarine" remains on the back burner. The director was also looking at the futuristic young adult novel "Dark Falls" earlier this year, and that also remains on his plate as a potential project.
Speaking to the French press while promoting "Legend of the Guardians," new "Superman" director Zack Snyder may have spilled the beans on what the plot may entail. If a shaky French translation is to be trusted, we're going to be blessed with yet another origin story.
