Darren Aronosfky (!) a contender to direct "Wolverine 2"

[JacksonArcher]

Deadline Hollywood is reporting that the director's gig for the sequel to X-Men Origins: Wolverine is now between Darren Aronosfky (Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain and the upcoming Black Swan) and David Slade (Hard Candy, 30 Days of Night).

It was supposed to be between Slade and Red director Robert Schwentke but Schwentke dropped out of contention for other directorial gigs. So apparently it's now between Aronosfky and Slade for the director's spot.

I was originally vying for Slade, as a big fan of Hard Candy, but now that Aronosfky is a contender he's automatically my favorite to direct. Apparently Aronosfky has been considered because of his professional relationship with Hugh Jackman, who worked with Aronosfky on The Fountain, and Jackman allegedly has serious clout over who gets the director's gig. However, according to that article, Slade has some leverage because he just directed the studio film The Twilight Saga: Eclipse.

While at this point I'll be happy with whomever gets selected -- and I'm just thrilled we have two directors in contention that are of superb caliber and extremely talented -- I really hope Aronosfky gets the job. He's one of my favorite directors and I think he would do wonders with this film. Something tells me Slade will get it but I can hope, right?

Thoughts?

 

[Samurai8472]

and Jackman allegedly has serious clout over who gets the director's gig.

There is this

1. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) (producer)

 

[JacksonArcher]

I forgive Jackman for X-Men Origins: Wolverine. It's not his fault the movie sucked or that he picked the wrong director. Gavin Hood did the fantastic Tsotsi and came from the same dramatic, independent background that Bryan Singer or Christopher Nolan did. I doubt Jackman figured Hood would have fucked it up as much as he did.

Aronosfky and Slade, however, seem like really good candidates. For some reason, I'm still hopeful.

 

[Myasishchev]

I'm not really sure I want Aronofsky--or, Christ, Jackman--wasting his time and talents with another Wolverine film.

On the other hand, if he wants to do it, and one completely ignores Origins, and circumstances just let Aronofsky run wild, it could be awesome.

I mean, I'll watch any movie by Aronofsky. That dude's a genius.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

Just so long he doesn't make it into a huge mindfuck, consider me on board with this selection.

 

[PsychoPere]

I haven't seen any of Slade's films, but I would just about die if Aronofsky were to direct. Aronofsky directing would pretty much be my definition of heaven. Of course, I'd also much rather just see more original work from him, but if a turning out a successful mainstream franchise film could give him more backing to pursue his own material, then so be it. Definitely looking forward to Black Swan.

I forgive Jackman for X-Men Origins: Wolverine. It's not his fault the movie sucked or that he picked the wrong director. [...]

It wasn't entirely Hood's fault, though, was it? I seem to recall reading several stories during production and shortly after the film came out that Fox screwed with him quite a bit.

I just spent a few minutes searching for a specific article that I recall reading around the time of X3 that talked about a specific Fox exec overseeing the X-Men franchise who was often in conflict with Bryan Singer over the first film and was basically pushed aside for Singer to have free reign when X2 went into production. Unfortunately, I can't find that article now but I seem to recall it also mentioning that he was able to reassert his control over the franchise once Singer was out of the picture and I feel like he was one of the driving forces behind the Wolverine mess.

I wish I could find that article so I wouldn't sound so speculative and vague about my recollections. I keep feeling that it was Tom Rothman, co-chair and CEO of Fox Filmed Entertainment, but I can't verify that since I can't find the article. I'm posting all of this anyways because I figure that if anyone would have a good memory of what I'm trying to talk about, it would be you, JA.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

I hope he eventually comes back to bring back Robocop as well after XO:W2

Kind of wonder how this movie could turn out in the hands of a top notch Japanese director, joint project with Japanese cinema.

 

[JacksonArcher]

It wasn't entirely Hood's fault, though, was it? I seem to recall reading several stories during production and shortly after the film came out that Fox screwed with him quite a bit.

I just spent a few minutes searching for a specific article that I recall reading around the time of X3 that talked about a specific Fox exec overseeing the X-Men franchise who was often in conflict with Bryan Singer over the first film and was basically pushed aside for Singer to have free reign when X2 went into production. Unfortunately, I can't find that article now but I seem to recall it also mentioning that he was able to reassert his control over the franchise once Singer was out of the picture and I feel like he was one of the driving forces behind the Wolverine mess.

I wish I could find that article so I wouldn't sound so speculative and vague about my recollections. I keep feeling that it was Tom Rothman, co-chair and CEO of Fox Filmed Entertainment, but I can't verify that since I can't find the article. I'm posting all of this anyways because I figure that if anyone would have a good memory of what I'm trying to talk about, it would be you, JA.

Well, it is true that 20th Century Fox has been notorious in their meddling of their productions including their comic-book properties such as X-Men and the Fantastic Four. They short-changed Bryan Singer on the first two movies in many ways, from cutting back time, budget, resources and basically making it nearly impossible for Singer to do some of the things he really wanted to do (for example, he wanted Sentinels, the Danger Room and other characters in X2 but they were cut; several origin sequences and characters had to be removed from X-Men because of time and budget restraints).

They were also stingy when it came to negotiations for X-Men 3 which is one of the main reasons why Bryan Singer jumped ship to Warner Bros. WB has a solid reputation especially as of late for providing directors with the creative freedom to do the types of films they want to do (Christopher Nolan is a prime example) and the freedom and flexibility they gave Singer (Carte blanche, basically) was something he didn't have with the X-Men movies.

There were reports that Gavin Hood and Tom Rothman were having difficulties on X-Men Origins: Wolverine. There were rumors, which were somewhat validated by Hood, that Fox was feeling skeptical about Hood's abilities and flew in Richard Donner to do some second unit work on some of the action sequences and other scenes (Lauren Shuler-Donner, wife of Richard Donner, said that Richard Donner was merely flown in as a "consultant"). It's telling that Hood was not offered to come back for Wolverine 2 (allegedly he was willing). Rothman has been a thorn in many filmmakers' sides. He was a big part of the reason why Singer departed X3. Alex Proyas said after directing I, Robot that unless of a regime change he would never do another movie for 20th Century Fox again.

However, Singer and Rothman have since ironed out their differences. Clearly, though, Rothman didn't iron out his differences with Gavin Hood. Still, even with a lot of the limitations that Singer had with the first two movies, he still managed to make good movies. The fact that Rothman invited Singer back to the X-Men universe is highly indicative that they realize this. So while Hood doesn't deserve full blame, he was the director. Many directors working within the confines of the studio system encounter inference and problems, but that's a part of the game. Clearly Hood didn't have the stamina or prevalence to stick it out and at the very least make a decent movie. There is no excusing a bad movie on the level of X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

 

[T'Baio]

If Aronofsky directs the next one I would shit my pants in joy.

I honestly can't see it happening, though.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Yeah, it would be awesome, and therefore it would never happen.

 

[Timby]

Many directors working within the confines of the studio system encounter inference

They encounter conclusions derived through reasoning?

 

[Captaindemotion]

Note of caution: Anyone read the godawful script Aaranofsky and Frank Miller turned out for a potential adaptation of Batman: Year One some time ago. Where Alfred was a jive-talking black guy and Batman got his name because of the Bat-shaped indentations left by punches thrown when wearing his father's rings? Where the Batcave was a garage?

Still, for all that, he's a talented director and the combination of his and McQuarrie's abilities ought to make for a good movie. I'd also be perfectly happy if Slade landed the gig, on the basis of his excellent 40 Days of Night.

 

[PsychoPere]

There is no excusing a bad movie on the level of X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

So awful that it put me to sleep despite having been fully awake when I started watching it... Yeah, can't disagree with you here at all.

Thanks for the clarifications!

 

[Myasishchev]

Note of caution: Anyone read the godawful script Aaranofsky and Frank Miller turned out for a potential adaptation of Batman: Year One some time ago. Where Alfred was a jive-talking black guy and Batman got his name because of the Bat-shaped indentations left by punches thrown when wearing his father's rings? Where the Batcave was a garage?

Upsetting if so, especially given that they already had a script. It's not like Batman: Year One is some Watchmen-like opus and by nature unfilmable in its canonical version; you could probably literally film Year One shot for shot exactly.

And in fairness to Aronofsky, latterday Frank Miller is a crazy street person. I would expect the GoddamnBatman-esque elements to be largely his input.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

I'd actually like to see this continue as a trend where these serious dramatic directors get a crack at comicbook adaptations or at least in contention so say whoever did get the job makes a shitty movie, we will always ask what could have been. Let's just hope they're awesome movies coming our way next year.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

I forgive Jackman for X-Men Origins: Wolverine. It's not his fault the movie sucked or that he picked the wrong director. Gavin Hood did the fantastic Tsotsi and came from the same dramatic, independent background that Bryan Singer or Christopher Nolan did. I doubt Jackman figured Hood would have fucked it up as much as he did.

I don't think too much blame can be laid at Hood's feet. Wolverine was screwed the moment 20th Century Fox decided to do the Weapon X storyline instead of the Japan storyline (which is reportedly the plotline they're using for Wolverine II).

Well, it is true that 20th Century Fox has been notorious in their meddling of their productions including their comic-book properties such as X-Men and the Fantastic Four. They short-changed Bryan Singer on the first two movies in many ways, from cutting back time, budget, resources and basically making it nearly impossible for Singer to do some of the things he really wanted to do (for example, he wanted Sentinels, the Danger Room and other characters in X2 but they were cut; several origin sequences and characters had to be removed from X-Men because of time and budget restraints).

For another example, X-Men was originally supposed to come out in the fall of 2000. Midway through production, 20th Century Fox informed Singer that they felt that X-Men was more of a summer movie. Singer breathed a huge sigh of relief until they informed him that they meant summer of 2000, not 2001.

Note of caution: Anyone read the godawful script Aaranofsky and Frank Miller turned out for a potential adaptation of Batman: Year One some time ago. Where Alfred was a jive-talking black guy and Batman got his name because of the Bat-shaped indentations left by punches thrown when wearing his father's rings? Where the Batcave was a garage?

Upsetting if so, especially given that they already had a script. It's not like Batman: Year One is some Watchmen-like opus and by nature unfilmable in its canonical version; you could probably literally film Year One shot for shot exactly.

And in fairness to Aronofsky, latterday Frank Miller is a crazy street person. I would expect the GoddamnBatman-esque elements to be largely his input.

I suspect so. Still, you'd think Aronofsky would know enough about Batman to not indulge Miller's madness.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Many directors working within the confines of the studio system encounter inference

They encounter conclusions derived through reasoning?

I meant interference. What are you, the Grammar Nazi?

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

Many directors working within the confines of the studio system encounter inference

They encounter conclusions derived through reasoning?

I meant interference. What are you, the Grammar Nazi?

Actually, that would probably make him a Spelling Nazi or a Word Usage Nazi.

Meanwhile, I'm the Proper Nazi Identification Nazi.

 

[CaptainCanada]

I don't think too much blame can be laid at Hood's feet. Wolverine was screwed the moment 20th Century Fox decided to do the Weapon X storyline instead of the Japan storyline

Er, why?

"Weapon X" is one of the classic Wolverine stories. There's nothing inherently bad about wanting to do an origin film; Logan has a great origin story. The problem was they made a hash of it.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

I don't think too much blame can be laid at Hood's feet. Wolverine was screwed the moment 20th Century Fox decided to do the Weapon X storyline instead of the Japan storyline

Er, why?

"Weapon X" is one of the classic Wolverine stories. There's nothing inherently bad about wanting to do an origin film; Logan has a great origin story. The problem was they made a hash of it.

But they'd already covered most of that territory in X2, so there were very few surprises. Prequels are tricky that way. There has to be enough to build a story around but not so much that you know everything that's going to happen.

(In that respect, I think the Star Wars prequels did it best. You knew some of the final beats in Episode III like the rise of Emperor Palpatine, the extermination of the Jedi, and Anakin Skywalker becoming Darth Vader. But most of the other stuff was a big question mark. We knew that Luke & Leia must have a mother but we didn't know anything about her. They had made vague references to the Clone Wars but not enough to really give anyone an idea about what they were really about. Other stuff, like the Trade Federation, Qui-Gon Jinn, Darth Maul, Count Dooku, & General Grievous were totally blank slates.)