Christopher Nolan Meeting With Directorial Candidates

[Astrodust]

I think this whole godfathering thing is getting in the way of finding a great director. Mind you it could work out to be fine but you are definitely limited to directors that don't mind working with another director and relinquishing some control. The top directors don't like their hand guided. They should of just called Nolan producer cause it's less intimidating. Like I said earlier you can't have 2 conductors in one orchestra.

 

[Micromind]

Bringing Robert Zemeckis in director's chair will boost general public confidence in this movie.

I like Robert Zemeckis as a Superman director, just imagine the flying scenes in his version of Superman movie !

 

[Micromind]

I think this whole godfathering thing is getting in the way of finding a great director. Mind you it could work out to be fine but you are definitely limited to directors that don't mind working with another director and relinquishing some control. The top directors don't like their hand guided. They should of just called Nolan producer cause it's less intimidating. Like I said earlier you can't have 2 conductors in one orchestra.

I think Nolan's role is to get the movie going by making sure that a good story / script is in place, a competent director is at the helm and some big name cast is attached to it, beyond that I don't think that he will be interfering in the movie making process.

Nolan has his own Batman 3 movie to produce and direct, he cannot do two things at the same time.

 

[X Knight]

Has it even been confirmed if Nolan has met with Zemeckis?

 

[daywalker2007]

if zemeckis gets the job, then it will be awesome. he gets a lifetime pass from me for making some of the greatest films in history. back to the future is one of the greatest movies ever made.

 

[daywalker2007]

go Zemeckis, lets the start the band wagon now.

i am going to see back to the future again this weekend for its 25th anniversary. the man is a legend.

i would love to see what zemeckis could do with Superman, it would be original, fun, and exciting.

i also have a sneaky feeling that Spielberg will be involved in some capacity if Zemeckis gets it, maybe as a producer or providing some input.

 

[akfj]

Has it even been confirmed if Nolan has met with Zemeckis?

No. An article mentioned that Zemeckis may be interested, but that was the extent of it. There was no mention of WB/Nolan being interested in him.

I think this whole godfathering thing is getting in the way of finding a great director. Mind you it could work out to be fine but you are definitely limited to directors that don't mind working with another director and relinquishing some control. The top directors don't like their hand guided. They should of just called Nolan producer cause it's less intimidating. Like I said earlier you can't have 2 conductors in one orchestra.

I don't think WB/Nolan has said the word "godfather" in regard to his role. I think that came from the movie websites. I'm sure when these directors meet with Nolan he will tell them the extent of his role.

I think Nolan's role is to get the movie going by making sure that a good story / script is in place, a competent director is at the helm and some big name cast is attached to it, beyond that I don't think that he will be interfering in the movie making process.

Nolan has his own Batman 3 movie to produce and direct, he cannot do two things at the same time.

 

[Astrodust]

I think Nolan's role is to get the movie going by making sure that a good story / script is in place, a competent director is at the helm and some big name cast is attached to it, beyond that I don't think that he will be interfering in the movie making process.

Nolan has his own Batman 3 movie to produce and direct, he cannot do two things at the same time.

That is also the role of a producer so they should just call him that. Mind you depending on the director and his team, they would have some extra power like choosing the cast. Whatever, I think godfather is just a fancy name for producer anyways. When all is said and done Nolan's name will come up as producer or executive producer.

 

[BestGirl]

I mean Superman exists on a higher evolutionary plane altogether, physically and mentally due to his origin and his earthly parents and upbringing. He simply does not have an evil "human" thought in his head. He's a super-man.
This is how he should be portrayed regardless of his surroundings.

But of course, he should be affected by the rotten state of the planet to a certain extent.

Except I haven't sen any evidence that Kryptonians are in any way more moral than the rest of us. I'd rather have Superman's goodness be the result of his upbringing, which would make the Kents more important.

 

[GreenKToo]

Except I haven't sen any evidence that Kryptonians are in any way more moral than the rest of us. I'd rather have Superman's goodness be the result of his upbringing, which would make the Kents more important.

I agree. Red Son is a good example of what ''could have'' happened if he had been brought up differently.

 

[X Knight]

Except I haven't sen any evidence that Kryptonians are in any way more moral than the rest of us. I'd rather have Superman's goodness be the result of his upbringing, which would make the Kents more important.

^this.

Superman gets his powers from his Kryptonian genes. But he gets his super "character" from his upbringing by the Kents. And that's what makes him truly a hero!

 

[Rust]

So, I guess we can ditch the list altogether now, wouldn't you agree?

http://www.**************.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=23330

Not saying that they're not looking at Reeves, but I think it's safe to say that we shouldn't rely on anything that's not official. That list is just bogues imo.
What a waste of time it is discussing rumors...

 

[romeogbs19]

^this.

Superman gets his powers from his Kryptonian genes. But he gets his super "character" from his upbringing by the Kents. And that's what makes him truly a hero!

And not to mention, that's what gives Superman his humanity. It's what makes him feel like he belongs to Earth and not to Krypton.

As for the director list and Matt Reeves, IMHO, I was a little shell-shocked by Reeves because his movies -- while great -- again seemed rather radically dark versus what I picture for a Superman film.

Again, I get that the story around Superman can be dark so I don't have much beef with someone like Reeves. I guess after Returns, I'm just a little paranoid about anyone whose film resume is mostly made up of dark horror flicks. I REALLY don't want another Superman film where the World's Greatest Hero has to somehow be morally degraded for the sake of "connecting" more with today's people. Superman is and always was the ideal -- the role model to which others looked to for inspiration.

If you haven't read Tom DeHaven's book, "Our Hero: Superman," I highly recommend it. I'm reading it right now and it's an excellent meditation on what Superman means and why the character has endured for so long.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I guess after Returns, I'm just a little paranoid about anyone whose film resume is mostly made up of dark horror flicks.

The movie Richard Donner was known for before Superman was The Omen. Sam Raimi made the Evil Dead movies which he was most well-known for before Spider-Man, and just look at the movies Peter Jackson made before he got the Lord of the Rings gig. I'm pretty certain there aren't many directors who stick to a single tone for every movie they make.

 

[Rust]

The movie Richard Donner was known for before Superman was The Omen. Sam Raimi made the Evil Dead movies which he was most well-known for before Spider-Man, and just look at the movies Peter Jackson made before he got the Lord of the Rings gig. I'm pretty certain there aren't many directors who stick to a single tone for every movie they make.

George A. Romero. t:


But I agree. A directors credentials isn't an indicator unless the movies are all bollocks.

 

[General Vulcun]

So, I guess we can ditch the list altogether now, wouldn't you agree?

http://www.**************.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=23330

Not saying that they're not looking at Reeves, but I think it's safe to say that we shouldn't rely on anything that's not official. That list is just bogues imo.
What a waste of time it is discussing rumors...

I've learned that when it comes to anything, never say never until the deal is either done with them or someone else. Until Reeves is/isn't signed on as a director, this report means nothing.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I know the bit on Affleck is old news, but it looks like he was Chris Nolan's choice and WB offered Affleck the gig, according to Nikki Finki:

And Warner Bros just offered him Superman to helm on Chris Nolan's suggestion. (But Affleck likely will turn it down.)

http://www.deadline.com/2010/10/first-box-office-social-network-27m/#more-71896

 

[Project862006]

they both have a very similar style imo

not surprising

 

[Naite22]

I'm truely excited to hear who will get to portray superman this time around. I'm STILL hoping that Brandon Routh will get to play him again. I know he'll be meeting with Chris Nolan at some point, that much have been told. Saw Returns again yesterday, and in so many areas it really is underated. I dont see the need to search the world for a new superman. That would be only for the sake of searching. They have the perfect clark kent aka superman in routh. He should definitely get another shot.

 

[DocHoliday]

I was actually sort of interested in seeing what Affleck might do with it. Oh well, I still hope he creates his "Blade runner-esque" universe eventually. As for Zemeckis, that'd be pretty damn cool. That's if he doesnt't do the time travel movie. Frost at COLLIDER.com says he knows who it it'll most likely be but is sworn to silence.

 

[Naite22]

Bring Richard Donner back to direct

 

[Aesop Rocks]

I can't wait for the Affleck haters to rip this apart.

...

not knowing he's a brilliant writer/director.

 

[DavidTyler]

I'm truely excited to hear who will get to portray superman this time around. I'm STILL hoping that Brandon Routh will get to play him again. I know he'll be meeting with Chris Nolan at some point, that much have been told. Saw Returns again yesterday, and in so many areas it really is underated. I dont see the need to search the world for a new superman. That would be only for the sake of searching. They have the perfect clark kent aka superman in routh. He should definitely get another shot.

I'm sorry but I abolutely hate that interpretation of Clark. Clark as the flop-mopped, watered down Chris Reeve nerd makes me cringe. Unless they can get Brandon to go a different way with the character, I don't want him back in the costume.

I want someone who'll take the Dean Cain and George Reeves versions and come up with something more like the Timm/Dini version of the character.

I also want his other identity to be more aggresive and sport more emotions ... from anger to humour.

I don't think Routh is the guy to do either. I hope they find a whole new candidate for the role. Someone who isn't, physically, an echo of Chris Reeve.

 

[MadVillainy]

I think this whole godfathering thing is getting in the way of finding a great director. Mind you it could work out to be fine but you are definitely limited to directors that don't mind working with another director and relinquishing some control. The top directors don't like their hand guided. They should of just called Nolan producer cause it's less intimidating. Like I said earlier you can't have 2 conductors in one orchestra.

I agree with this.

---------------------------------------------

Affleck is a good director and I even think he's a good actor. However, as Ive said none of the choices said have really made me think that they're perfect for directing Superman. Most of them seemed better suited to direct darker heroes. But we'll see how it plays out

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Zemeckis is way past his prime, as is Donner.