Tales of Snyder, Aronofsky, Siegel, Shuster and superheroes

201010061255 Tales of Snyder, Aronofsky, Siegel, Shuster and superheroes

Did Zack Snyder get the Superman gig because he’s the only director in town who could get the baggage-heavy franchise back in production before 2011? That’s what Claude Brodesser-Akner is reporting over at Vulture. And why 2011? It’s not because of the Mayan calendar, but rather a deadline of another sort. Based on their filings for copyright reversion (which Warner Bros. has pulled out every trick in the book to stop) the Siegel family will regain control of their half of Superman in 2013, with the Joe Shuster heirs expected to get theirs back soon after. So a movie has to get made before then.
Ricky Sprague has more details of all the legal proceedings. Simply put, Warners HAS to start making a Superman movie. And despite what others were saying, the David Goyer script for the reboot isn’t exactly in shape and sporting a six pack:

Even as Aronofsky’s Wolverine 2 talks coalesce at Fox, Warner Bros. is still offering blandishments to get back into business. We’re told by knowledgeable insiders the reason Warner Bros. picked Snyder for Man of Steel is that the script by David Goyer was rushed, is still a bit of a mess, and that Warner Bros. needs someone who won’t spend months or even years trying to get it just right (i.e. Aronofsky), because time is the one thing they don’t have: The studio must have a new Superman movie in production by 2011 or they’ll be subject to potential lawsuits by the heirs of the superhero’s creators.

We’re told that Snyder was not really Warner’s first choice to direct Superman, but that a director needed to be hired imminently. Privately, even Snyder has confided to agency sources that the current Superman script needs work, but clearly Warner Bros. believes he can get it done faster than Aronofsky.


Brodesser-Akner’s other bit of news is that Darren Aronofsky is now the front runner to direct Wolverine 2, which, despite the puzzlement of The Fountain, would be an easy-to-sell reteaming of Aronofsky and Hugh Jackman. With his creepy Black Swan getting raves reviews everywhere, Aronofsky is long overdue to make his first real comic book movie . He’s been talking about it since long before it was fashionable, and we stand by the idea that he might just make the greatest comic book actioner of all times — if the studio lets him. In other Superman news, Brandon Routh isn’t expected to return, which is kind of a shame, because he really, really looks like Superman. And General Zod will be the villain and we haven’t seen that in 30 years or so, so the world must be waiting for it.

Comments

  1. Drew Hart says:

    Well my optimism just went to guarded pessimism bordering on hmmmm . . .

  2. Paul D. Storrie says:

    “And General Zod will be the villain and we haven’t seen that in 30 years or so, so the world must be waiting for it.”

    Or one year, for people who watch SMALLVILLE.

    PDS

  3. Brett says:

    Zod is all over Smallville. So is Jor El (Isn’t he supposed to be dead?). It’s one of the reasons I don’t watch Smallville regularly.

  4. I guess having Zod (and a few Phantom Zone criminals, I’m sure) would be faster and easier to film than the host of robotic invaders needed to have Brainiac as the villain. Still, it’d be cool to have Superman take on a robotic alien army just to show Neo how it’s done!

  5. Synsidar says:

    The account makes the project seem to be a Superman movie being made for all of the wrong reasons and none of the right ones. If the movie flops, the producers can point to the creators’ heirs and the lawsuit and blame them.

    SRS

  6. Jeffy says:

    “Or one year, for people who watch SMALLVILLE.”

    Haha, you just admitted to watching Smallville

  7. “Zod is all over Smallville. So is Jor El (Isn’t he supposed to be dead?). It’s one of the reasons I don’t watch Smallville regularly.”

    SMALLVILLE’s Zod has appeared in two instances in the series, but one was Zod’s spirit/consciousness inhabiting Lex Luthor’s body. and the other was a clone of Zod’s younger self, while the actual Zod remained trapped in the Phantom Zone. So technically, we haven’t seen a legitimate live-action Superman/Zod fight since SUPERMAN II.

    As for Jor-El, SMALLVILLE’s version (voiced by former General Zod actor Terence Stamp) is simply the voice program in the Fortress of Solitude, similar to what was shown in the Superman films. I really don’t know why that would keep you from enjoying such a fun series.

  8. Brett says:

    “SMALLVILLE’s Zod has appeared in two instances in the series, but one was Zod’s spirit/consciousness inhabiting Lex Luthor’s body. and the other was a clone of Zod’s younger self, while the actual Zod remained trapped in the Phantom Zone.”

    That’s one of the reasons I don’t find Smallville fun: Zod is in Luthor, he’s in a clone, he’s in the phantom zone…

    Now, he’ll be in the new Superman movie.

    Not interested.

  9. CitizenCliff says:

    Superman is super lame. Nobody knows that guy Clark Kent is Superman because he wears glass. He’s an alien, but he’s a white guy, who just happened to land in Kansas, the whitest region of the Earth — coincidence? What if he’d landed in Jamaica? He’d be Supermon. He’d have dreadlocks, which would be far better than that ridiculous mullet he was sporting back in the 90’s. Who’s idea was that anyway?

    If Superman is such a super guy, why does he fall for Lois Lane, who’s always a super bitch? She’s a phony.

    I say make a movie with Bizzaro, and let Charlie Kaufman write the screenplay. Let Bruce Cambell play Bizzaro.

  10. bad wolf says:

    Congratulations Warners, Disney et al… you’ve helped extend copyright so far back that it’s going out of your hands too.

  11. Glenn Simpson says:

    Just curious – why do they have to make a movie? Doesn’t the fact that DC publishes comics every month satisfy whatever “use it or lose it” activity is required?

  12. “If Superman’s rocket crashed in Jamaica, he’d have dreadlocks and be called ‘Supermon'”

    LOL!

    That was hysterical.

  13. If Warners makes a movie AFTER the estate claims the copyrght, then WB must share half of the revenue with them, as the estate would co-own the character an be entitled to a share. Remember the Fox Watchmen controversy? Or Dukes of Hazard? WB does not like to share money.

  14. Bad motives = bad movies.

  15. I don’t mind thinking of Movie studios as financial machines out to make a buck before a piece of art but I’d like to think they had a bit more sense and the ability to plan ahead. IF Snyder’s involvement is related to the fact that they wanted something quick (and the 2013 deadline has been common knowledge for a while) why didn’t they just get ball rolling straight after Returns? And the idea that they took longer to see how Returns fared on DVD because it wasn’t a HUGE smash doesn’t make sense as it sounds like they would be willing to make a Superman movie come what may in order to cash in on his Brand Image.

    I feel a bit sorry for Snyder, he seems like a cool guy and I think he’s been put in a wierd position now because of all this.

Speak Your Mind

*