The blogosphere is all abuzz this week with the one-two punch of comic book-related big screen deals: first, Zack Snyder, contested director of “300” and “Watchmen,” will direct the Christopher Nolan-supervised, David Goyer-scripted reboot of the mother-0f-all-superhero-franchises, “Superman.” But wait! As a follow-up to the “Superman” stories, it was noted that Darren Aronofsky, riding the high from all the festival buzz his supernatural ballet thriller “Black Swan” is garnering, was first in line for the gig and may still direct a high profile superhero franchise joint — 20th Century Fox’s “Wolverine 2.” Well, we’re here to write a letter to you, Mr. Aronofsky, hoping you will stop for a moment to consider this career move.
You remain the rare director who has followed through on the initial visual and storytelling promise you displayed in your debut feature “Pi” and sophomore effort “Requiem for a Dream.” Taking the second sequel to what was an inauspicious — no, embarrassing — opening to a new spin-off franchise (“X-Men Origins: Wolverine”) is something that an eager up-and-coming music video or commercial director would take, not something that a seasoned professional like you, who spent an agonizingly long time getting his difficult sci-fi opus “The Fountain” off the ground, would rush into (hey, we like Hugh Jackman too, but ‘Wolverine’ was painful).
And besides, you have so many other cool projects that you could do instead. You are one of those directors who are perennially attached to about a dozen different projects at any given time, and we must say, these proposed projects all sound way more interesting than “Wolverine 2,” whose script by Christopher McQuarrie reportedly pits the adamantium-clawed superhero against ninjas in Japan (been there, slashed that). These include the long-gestating (and, we reluctantly admit, most likely deceased) Noah’s Ark project, more recent fare like an adaptation of non-fiction survival thriller “The Tiger” with Brad Pitt, highbrow literary adaptation “Serena” with Angelina Jolie, and most intriguingly, “Jackie,” about Jackie Kennedy in the days following JFK’s assassination, which would star your lovely partner Rachel Weisz. Hell, maybe MGM will get its shit together and you can do your worthy “Robocop” reboot.
Despite the relatively short gestation period between your Oscar-nominated drama “The Wrestler” and your sure-to-be-Oscar-nominated drama “Black Swan,” these seem like projects which would take years to properly develop. “Wolverine 2” would be something that Fox would want, like, yesterday (they’re probably already working on the action figures), without much time for artistic fussiness that takes time and makes for better movies. And it’s not like something you’re all that emotionally attached to. As you recently told MTV, “I didn’t really have comic books. I didn’t really know who Wolverine was until I met Hugh Jackman and got to know it.” We know that some directors see these comic book things as passion projects but for you, it seems like another gig.
Still, as the LA Times pointed out, these big franchise movies can prove irresistible to directors, especially in the wonky, paradigm-shifting world of Hollywood, circa 2010. They cite super-genius Pixar auteur Brad Bird, who recently took the reins on the probably-not-called-“Mission: Impossible IV,” and Marc Webb willingly signing on to the upcoming “Spider-Man” do-over (although, really, Webb should feel lucky to have been catapulted into the same sentence as yourself and Bird). Maybe doing “Wolverine 2” would be a frugal career move. After all, you worked on a “Batman Begins”-type reboot with Frank Miller before Christopher Nolan took command, and the Times piece cites Nolan, who balances his artistic proclivities with big budget responsibilities, as an inspiration to those off-kilter directors seeking entry to the franchise wheelhouse.
Plus, the material the “Wolverine 2” script is supposedly based on Chris Claremont and Frank Miller’s run in the 1980s, which had the hero battling a squadron of ninjas while dealing with some sore emotional issues (some wounds never heal). If McQuarrie’s script hits the tone of the comic book, which combined high-wire action with a deeply unsettled emotional core, then you’re probably in good shape. We personally hope that maybe McQuarrie had mixed in some of Brian K. Vaughn’s limited series “Logan” from a couple of years ago, which was the closest thing we’ve ever read to a Terrence Malick-penned superhero book (and covered similar thematic terrain to the Claremont/Miller series).
We have no doubt that you would do a fine job on Wolverine kicking ass in Japan; “The Fountain” in particular showed your uncanny knack for cross-cutting and recurrent images and “frames,” hallmarks of comic books. We just think that maybe…. your skills could be used on a more worthy, more original project. Maybe you can get your comic book ya-yas out on some as-yet-unannounced original project and all that creativity and design work you’ve done over the years on a variety of comic book properties (among them, for a time, “Watchmen”) will come flooding out in one giant gush (after all, didn’t you get more of your “Perfect Blue” ya yas out in “Black Swan”?). If “Inception” and “District 9” has shown us anything, it’s that occasionally studios will roll the dice on an original concept, even if it is expensive.
Obviously, the choice is up to you. But we’re not the only ones questioning whether or not you can maintain your creative autonomy in a big studio set-up, especially one as mercurial as 20th Century Fox (not known as the most artistic friendly studio these days), who throws dozens of seasoned screenwriters at troubled scripts hoping that something (or anything) will stick, but what they usually end up with is “The A-Team.” Well, Mr. Aronofsky, you’re better than “The A-Team.” And you’re better than “Wolverine 2.” C’mon, you and Rachel or you and Angie? Any number of drones can sleepwalk Hugh through this misguided passion project of his; why don’t you do a musical with him one day and you’ll both come out better in the end. Fine, even if you do end up making it, we suppose, we’ll be first in line regardless.
Hugs and kisses,
The Playlist
(We’ll be waiting for you in the space bubble.)
The first one was so bad that it's a no-lose situation for Aronofsky – he couldn't possibly make a movie as bad as Gavin Hood's disaster.
Darren. Baby. Bubbala. Kill Wolverine at the end. Lobby for this. Make it happen.
I think that if he just tries to make it a stand alone film amidst the whole sequel to a prequel thing, it will be fine. An Aronofsky action film in Japan sounds awesome. Just as long as the baggage doesn't hold it down.
Agreed. I don't have a problem with him taking a Nolan-esque dip into mainstream fare as long as it's something he is passionate about. But making a sequel to a terrible film he has no interest in doesn't sound like it.
Hmmm….a movie about ninja's in Japan fighting Wolverine. Perhaps they should get a director with a strong background directing martial arts movies. Just saying…
Nah, that's what stunt coordinators and second unit directors are for. How many martial arts movies did Quentin Tarantino direct before Kill Bill?
And there's no reason Wolverine 2 can't be good, as long as Aronofskey has a good keep-your-meddling-hands-out-of-it-Fox contract going in. This is the story they should have adapted in the first place, as opposed to the nobody-asked-for-it Origins.