I hate you 20th Century Fox

[Conan_Aficionado]

I'm sure there are a lot of qualified directors who could do a fine job with this flick.

 

I just hope we get something, something is better than nothing.

[bluechip]

'Wolverine 2' Director: Darren Aronofsky Rejects Offer of More Money Instead of More ControlSource: By Timothy Sexton, Yahoo! Contributor Network

Contribute content like this. Start Here

Mon Mar 21, 2011, 1:45 pm EDT 1 Comment

Buzz up!

Share

emailimdel.ici.ousdiggfacebook...

The big question was why the director of such distinctly personal and idiosyncratic films as "Requiem for a Dream" and "Black Swan" would have wanted to direct a splashy big budget special effects laden movie about most people's favorite mutant, Wolverine. (Personally, I prefer Nightcrawler, but that's just me recognizing how much more interesting an overlooked character is than the leading man's character. ) The question recently became moot with the announcement that Aronofsky was leaving the project.

 

Maybe an even bigger question is why the suits who expect to make oodles of money off yet another trip to the "X-Men" money well would consider hiring a director not exactly known for that type of movie or for creating massively popular works of cinematic art. Perhaps the folks at Fox just wanted to lend the movie a little critical cache just in case the result wasn't a rowdy crowd pleasing blockbuster.

 

Aronofsky's critical cache as well as his bankability went upscale following several Oscar nominations for "Black Swan." The skinny is that Aronofsky used the clout that comes with a Best Director nomination to urge the bean counters at Fox to give him more creative control over the "Wolverine 2" movie. Bean counters in the movie business typically hold onto the suggestion that everybody in the business, by which I mean the industry, share their view of wealth as being more important than anything else.

 

Fox allegedly turned down Aronofsky's request for control and instead offered him more money to get him to shut up about not having as much control over "Wolverine 2" as he's enjoyed on his far more personal films. The skinny continues thusly: Darren Aronofsky flatly rejected the proposed deal of exchanging more control for more money and took a powder on the hairy X-Man.

 

Back to that big question of why in the first place. Those who love Aronofsky precisely because he doesn't make movies like an entry in the X-Men franchise are doubtlessly raising their glasses to toast the myopia shared by all the suits at Fox. But is that the proper response? Yes, certainly, he will go on to make another movie in the place of "Wolverine 2" that will probably be much closer in spirit to his smaller critically acclaimed films. While that is unquestionably a positive end to this whole bizarre affair, one cannot help but wonder what a "Wolverine" sequel would be like with the intensely independent perspective of a more artistically inclined director behind it. The conventional wisdom is that the two entities just don't match up and so the result would be a failure on all accounts.

 

For those who believe this way, let me recommend the result of what happened when Orson Welles was given the opportunity to direct just another entry in the overcrowded genre of crime flicks about police corruption. The movie is called "Touch of Evil" and it will forever remain the standard by which to judge the potential for matching the fiercely independent vision of an artiste with what appears to be little more than another addition to another overdone genre.

 

This really shows that Fox doesn't care about the stories and they just want to make more $$$$

 

 

In fairness to Fox, I should give the flipside of that argument and point out that Fox and other studios have, at times, allowed a visionary genius director to do just what the director wanted, only to end up with a truly horrible film that lost millions. In fact, a couple ot studios have gone belly up that way.

 

But "Touch of Evil" was effing brilliant.

 

 

[divad]

[Fox and other studios have, at times, allowed a visionary genius director to do just what the director wanted, only to end up with a truly horrible film that lost millions. In fact, a couple ot studios have gone belly up that way.

 

But "Touch of Evil" was effing brilliant.

 

 

Yep, amazing that it was a huge box office flop that nearly brought the studio to its knees . . .

[NewEnglandGothic]

This really shows that Fox doesn't care about the stories and they just want to make more $$$$

Fox has done a great job developing Locke & Key so far...

Oh wait. They hired Jesse McCartney in a crucial lead role.

[Marvelfangirl]

This really shows that Fox doesn't care about the stories and they just want to make more $$$$

Fox has done a great job developing Locke & Key so far...

Oh wait. They hired Jesse McCartney in a crucial lead role.

[Gatsby77]

But from Aronofky's point of view, he should have walked from ANY movie that didn't give him full creative control.

 

Spielberg's always said that Jaws was his most important film, because it gave him final cut. In perpetuity. After finally hitting not just profitabilty but blockbuster profitability with The Wrestler and Black Swan, Arronofsky would be a fool not to insist on final cut regardless of the project.

[NewEnglandGothic]

This really shows that Fox doesn't care about the stories and they just want to make more $$$$

Fox has done a great job developing Locke & Key so far...

Oh wait. They hired Jesse McCartney in a crucial lead role.

I'm getting by, I'm just hoping for the best.

This reminds me of when Darren couldn't direct the Batman reboot with Brad Pitt as Bruce Wayne either. Poor guy can't make a comic-book movie.

[Prince Namor]

He should do a Grant Morrison era Doom Patrol movie.

[A-DONIS]

Personally I think the X-Men franchise is done when it comes to movies.

 

Whatever happened to the Deadpool spinoff? - ON HOLD

 

X-Men First Class - Wow....Not interested

 

 

 

[Juswuh]

Marvel don't need, or in all likelihood want, auteur directors. They need people who can handle action and stick to schedule, budget and whatever creative brief's been handed down.

[fantastic_four]

Marvel don't need, or in all likelihood want, auteur directors. They need people who can handle action and stick to schedule, budget and whatever creative brief's been handed down.

 

They don't want them, but they do need them--they're just exceptionately difficult to find. If you don't agree, I'd like to introduce you to the wunderkind Warner Brothers handed control off to and whose auteurial they'll kiss as much as is necessary to keep him. A guy like this would've filtered right through the Marvel cheese grater without them having a clue of what they missed out on. They may have just missed a similar opportunity in turning away Aronofsky.

 

[EastEnd]

Aronofsky also made Requiem for a Dream which is a virtually unwatchable film (except for a couple of shall we say "interesting" scenes featuring Jennifer Connelly). The Wrestler and Black Swan were good films... not great films in my opinion. Too much hand-held shaking camera work (invariably from behind the actor) and way too many tight facial close-ups... these two elements seem to be his trademark. Mickey Rourke is tough to look at it to begin with, but when his face constantly fills the entire screen you just want to push it (and the movie) away.

 

If you're looking to make a "small" superhero film, Aronofsky may be your guy. But he has a penchant for being a bit too avant garde for the broader market and so if I were heading a studio investing a $100 million-plus in a film, I would never give him final cut either... too risky.

[fantastic_four]

If you're looking to make a "small" superhero film, Aronofsky may be your guy. But he has a penchant for being a bit too avant garde for the broader market and so if I were heading a studio investing a $100 million-plus in a film, I would never give him final cut either... too risky.

 

I hope you're right that they had a reason for not giving him control, but I've seen no evidence of it in the entire history of Marvel's films. They haven't done it yet and I'm skeptical they ever will with guys like Avi Arad and his successors forever wanting to stick their business-savvy but creatively untalented two cents in.

[chrisco37]

I thought "Requiem" was an amazing movie. Different strokes.

 

Did you ever watch "Pi"?

[EastEnd]

If you're looking to make a "small" superhero film, Aronofsky may be your guy. But he has a penchant for being a bit too avant garde for the broader market and so if I were heading a studio investing a $100 million-plus in a film, I would never give him final cut either... too risky.

 

I hope you're right that they had a reason for not giving him control, but I've seen no evidence of it in the entire history of Marvel's films. They haven't done it yet and I'm skeptical they ever will with guys like Avi Arad and his successors forever wanting to stick their business-savvy but creatively untalented two cents in.

 

So far they haven't had a need to do it... overall they've done quite well. Films based on Marvel characters have made/re-invigorated a lot of careers in Hollywood (and put a lot of cash in people's pockets). There's a plentiful supply of talent in Hollywood knocking on Marvel's door to get on their films despite the "Corporate" constraints.

 

 

 

[EastEnd]

I thought "Requiem" was an amazing movie. Different strokes.

 

Did you ever watch "Pi"?

 

No, haven't seen Pi... but like a I said, I did enjoy Wrestler and Black Swan. To me, Requiem was a mess... classic case of an "autuer" trying to make "art" and winding up with spaghetti (and also a film that had been done many times before but in much better fashion (see, for instance, Leaving Las Vegas). I think I almost slipped into a coma when ever Ellen Burstyn came on screen... but oh those Jennifer Connelly scenes!!!

[Prince Namor]

I thought "Requiem" was an amazing movie. Different strokes.

 

Did you ever watch "Pi"?

 

Yeah, I also thought Requiem was amazing. Brilliant movie.

Darren Aronofsky makes incredible movies, and will be remembered as a great film maker.

 

Marvel feels it's a safer bet to go after the 'Twilight' crowd.

 

I don't think that's what Hugh Jackman wants for Wolverine, and I see turbulence coming.

[lookwhoitis]

The First Wolverine movie sucked balls...

 

Touch of Evil is one of the greatest films in history by arguably the greatest director in history (well, maybe after Kurosawa).

 

Requiem for a Dream is a fantastic film, well received by both critics and audiences.

 

Aranofsky is a gifted director.

 

I always continue to laugh when oddballs try to pillory a brilliant film because their own high valued opinion is more important (to them) than the reception of the works merit by the majority.

 

Marvel has been CONSISTENTLY churning out films that are pieces of junk with a few exceptions of good ones.

 

I boycott Marvel as much as possible nowadays in protest, even though I grew up a Marvel Zombie and still continue to consume their product, (albeit by downloading the comics, sneaking into their films after I have already paid for a different one)

 

I am afraid the second wolverine movie might suck balls

[paperheart]

The First Wolverine movie sucked balls...

 

Touch of Evil is one of the greatest films in history by arguably the greatest director in history (well, maybe after Kurosawa).

 

Requiem for a Dream is a fantastic film, well received by both critics and audiences.

 

Aranofsky is a gifted director.

 

I always continue to laugh when oddballs try to pillory a brilliant film because their own high valued opinion is more important (to them) than the reception of the works merit by the majority.

 

Marvel has been CONSISTENTLY churning out films that are pieces of junk with a few exceptions of good ones.

 

I boycott Marvel as much as possible nowadays in protest, even though I grew up a Marvel Zombie and still continue to consume their product, (albeit by downloading the comics, sneaking into their films after I have already paid for a different one)

 

I am afraid the second wolverine movie might suck balls

 

- nail on head