Sequels What do you think M.Night Shyamalan as director??

[KON - EL]

Im not for it or against it , I just want to know what the people think. Unbreakable was a damn good movie, how do you think his superman would be ??

 

[deathshead2]

I see an unneeded plot twist.

 

[KON - EL]

this is true, i just thought that a superman movie would be interesting if he directed it.

 

[patrickbateman]

actually he would be great for red son man that ending was a great

 

[Cyrusbales]

I think Shyamalan is overrated, his choice of work is very hit and miss, and is also rather patchy within each film. He is by no means a great director, people just remeber him because of a few films, a great director can reel off an amazing filmography, Kubrik, Hitchcock, almodovar etc...

 

[matthooper]

M. Night's deal with the devil has expired. It only covered The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. Each film since has been bad with each one worse than the next. His last crapfest was so laughable it will probably win some Razzies.

 

[hypeSUPERMAN]

I would have chosen Michael Mann. It would guarantee extreme coolness and sharp imagery.

 

[BatFitz]

I considered M. Night when they were tossing around directors names...he would've had a LOT of input from Alex Ross

 

[Danger Mouse]

M. Night is not a proven action director. He's more into psychological drama. So, while I think he's one of the greatest brains in Hollywood, I wouldn't trust him with such a franchise.

 

[Fried Gold]

I would have chosen Michael Mann. It would guarantee extreme coolness and sharp imagery.

LOL, because Superman is the epitome of cool.

I think with a decent script (ie. something respectful to the source material and not written by a group of performing monkeys), Micheal Bay could've delivered a grand Superman film. Tony Scott could've been an interesting choice, too.

 

[hypeSUPERMAN]

LOL, because Superman is the epitome of cool.

I think with a decent script (ie. something respectful to the source material and not written by a group of performing monkeys), Micheal Bay could've delivered a grand Superman film. Tony Scott could've been an interesting choice, too.

Man on Fire was awesome so I like the idea of Tony Scott. The only reason I didn't choose him ahead of Mann is because Scott put a lot of artisitic editing into the picture of Man on Fire so I wouldn't want him to do Superman in exactly the same way cos I recall some people complaining that there was too much fancy editing in Man on Fire (even though I liked that editing personally), so as long as he tones done his creativity a bit to cater for the older viewers I think Scott would be good. And Scott sure knows how to create emotion in his movies, very powerful. But, like Scott, Mann has his own style and he would be a stylish choice to make Superman as cool as possible.

 

[db85usa]

Shyamalan would never direct a Superman movie because he himself says over and over and over again that he ONLY writes/directs/produces his OWN WORK.

What does that mean?

1.) He creates his own story and characters.
2.) He brings in his own $$$$ to--
3.) DIRECT IT!

Give it up, I'm so sick of hearing people wanting this guy to direct a Superman movie it's so sad. Sure, let's get him aboard and watch a slow boring @$$ movie about Superman who wouldn't be that Super to begin with and we'll also get a special screw job at the end of the flick.

I want someone fresh like the guy who directed V For Vendetta, James McTeigue. He directed a solid flick, with great action and a strong plot. He has been assistant director in The Matrix trilogy, Star Wars: Episode II, Dark City, and he is NOW set to be director for Logan's Run (2007) the movie which BRYAN SINGER himself was dying to direct. Now if we could just get rid of Singer so he could take over for Logan's Run and get McTeigue over here to direct a sequel to SR, which should be very easy to top!

 

[hypeSUPERMAN]

I think Singer has the trilogy locked up. I don't think there will be another director until 10 years time when they start another trilogy.

 

[matthooper]

I think Singer has the trilogy locked up. I don't think there will be another director until 10 years time when they start another trilogy.

What trilogy? A sequel hasn't even been greenlit.

 

[Kurt Wagner]

Night does his own stuff. Besides, he does long takes which doesn't work for an action movie. A superman movie with his style of directing doesn't work. It's be a really slow movie

Though It would have great cinematography and music.

 

[Jul-el]

Only if at the end the twist is that RETURNS never happened...Yeah,I LIKE IT!!

 

[matrix_ghost]

M. Night is not a proven action director. He's more into psychological drama. So, while I think he's one of the greatest brains in Hollywood, I wouldn't trust him with such a franchise.

Well i think the same stuff could've been said for alot of other directors before they all made a action movie :
The wachowski brothers ( untested with only bound as their first movie) , Ang Lee ( see all his movies pre-Crouching TIger) or Nolan ( granted he did move the camera a bit too close IMO , but you can't deny the fact that he didn't direct action movies prior to BB).
For all we know , Night be a avid Hong Kong action fan or a Dirty Harry lover.

I'd actually love to see what he would do to superman. Granted 'personally i would have him rather direct a Harry Potter movie , but with the right team advicing him on stunts and VFX , i would say that he could make a very good superman story.
He would obviously need to delve into the comics world as opposed to writing his own script but i'm sure he would , like you said , begin with the more psychological aspect of Superman. Imagine a superman movie like Kingdom Come. That would be a great Shyamalan supes vehicle.

 

[C. Lee]

Man on Fire was awesome so I like the idea of Tony Scott. The only reason I didn't choose him ahead of Mann is because Scott put a lot of artisitic editing into the picture of Man on Fire so I wouldn't want him to do Superman in exactly the same way cos I recall some people complaining that there was too much fancy editing in Man on Fire (even though I liked that editing personally), so as long as he tones done his creativity a bit to cater for the older viewers I think Scott would be good. And Scott sure knows how to create emotion in his movies, very powerful. But, like Scott, Mann has his own style and he would be a stylish choice to make Superman as cool as possible.

Storywise...."Man on Fire" was a 10 out of 10.....the Director's ArtsyFartsy "I must shake the camera every chance I get" style almost ruined it for me and many others. For that reason alone, I wouldn't want him to direct.

Shyamalan is a good director and storyteller....I've liked all of his movies so far (haven't seen Lady in the Water yet)...but as Mouse said, I don't know how well he would be with something that requires a fair amount of action. His working on the story wouldn't be a bad idea though.

 

[KalMart]

He's a one-trick pony, and the pony died in its infancy.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Bah. All his movies look the same. He is certainly not right for Superman. Spielberg, Zemeckys and Peter Jackson would be the best ideas.

 

[Cold2daToucH004]

I think Shyamalan is overrated, his choice of work is very hit and miss, and is also rather patchy within each film. He is by no means a great director, people just remeber him because of a few films, a great director can reel off an amazing filmography, Kubrik, Hitchcock, almodovar etc...

Well, hes still relatively new. He only works on films he writes. And the list of flicks he's done is not long.

No for Superman though.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Well, hes still relatively new. He only works on films he writes. And the list of flicks he's done is not long.

No for Superman though.

but there are other directors who've made only a few films, but they're still consistantly brilliant, Shyamalan isn't a good director by any strech, simple as!

 

[Kroc1138]

Seeing as how Shyamalan has yet to show any type of versitility as a Director I would keep him far away from any Superhero frachise. He really needs to pay his dues as a director.

 

[jughead]

didnt Shyamalan also do SIgns? I liked that one........... JMO

 

[matthooper]

Well, hes still relatively new. He only works on films he writes. And the list of flicks he's done is not long.

No for Superman though.

Shyamalan's first feature was 1992 and he has made seven films. Singer's first feature was 1995 and has made six films.

Neither hack should be anywhere near Superman.