Next Wolverine Movie Is An Experiment, Says Director

ShadowsofHope

Outsider
Nov 1, 2009
2,623
0
0
shadyh8er said:
Oh yeah, let's also not forget that it was Steven Spielberg (E.T., Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan) AND George Lucas who made Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
We do not speaketh of what does not exist!

OT: I'm curious, but I'm also really damned tired of Wolverine. Such a bland, hormonal character. No real development in the movies he's been in, so far. And this coming from a guy that thinks Hugh Jackman is a decent actor.
 

romxxii

New member
Feb 18, 2010
343
0
0
level250geek said:
Strain42 said:
Experiment when you're in film school or working on your own personal Clerks. Once you hit this point you shouldn't be taking gambles, you should be putting your attention into making a good film.
Aronofsky does make good films. Every single film he's made has been good. I think the "experiment" he's discussing in this interview is applying the way he makes films to superhero movies, and by that he means exactly what he says: making a superhero movie where things don't explode every five minutes and there's real emotional depth.

True, we got that in The Dark Knight, so I hesitate to say that this is the first time it's ever been done, but Aronofsky definitely brings a different flavor of film-making to the table. Where Nolan is deliberate and intense, Aronofsky is more contemplative and meandering, making his characters think and emote without getting whiney and weak.

This fits Wolverine perfectly, so I'm glad to see Aronofsky take on the character and I cannot wait until it comes out, especially given they're basing it on Miller's incredible story that pretty much is everything we love about Wolverine.

In fact, I wouldn't be upset if he decided that Mickey Rourke or even Jackie Earl Haley would make a better Wolverine than Hugh Jackman. In fact, I *really* wouldn't mind if he ended up making a sequel, with Haley's Wolverine going up against Rourke's Sabertooth. That would pretty much be the most awesome casting ever.
It's interesting you brought up The Dark Knight, because Aronofsky and Nolan have a similar directorial style. Just as a point of comparison, watch Requiem for a Dream and Memento: you'd think they were directed by the same guy.

Personally, I'd love to have Wolverine played by Rourke. His aging, yet burly physique is a better match for the centenarian Logan. Plus he's a better actor in my opinion.

Oh, and is it just me, or does Aronofsky look like a chubby Christian Bale? That's plus points in my book. :p
 

Badger Kyre

New member
Aug 25, 2010
250
0
0
I would pay MONEY to see his rendition of the Claremont/Miller Wolverine limited series I had as a little, the one set in Japan - IMO, that was THE seminal Wolvie story, sorta like Dark Knight returns or Miller's run on DareDevil.
 

DiMono

New member
Mar 18, 2010
837
0
0
I think a second Wolverine movie lines up as unnecessary, to be honest. They've already done a Wolverine origins movie, and now they want to do a second one for some reason. I can't tell you how much I'm looking forward to movie fans rebelling over the almost complete lack of original ideas coming out of Hollywood.
 

ZippyDSMlee

New member
Sep 1, 2007
3,959
0
0
All the comic films are entertainments...most of them flailed ones looking to smash something to get their drug fix....

When it coems to comic,TV and anime to Hollywood film transitions the less real world and realism and real world realism they use the better off the end product tends to be.

Case in point Incredible Hulk.
 

ark123

New member
Feb 19, 2009
485
0
0
Badger Kyre said:
I would pay MONEY to see his rendition of the Claremont/Miller Wolverine limited series I had as a little, the one set in Japan - IMO, that was THE seminal Wolvie story, sorta like Dark Knight returns or Miller's run on DareDevil.
Yes, that's the story arc they're going for if I'm not mistaken. The one with Mariko Yashida, Silver Samurai, etc.
This is also a good version of Wolverine for Aronofsky because if I remember correctly it's a darker, more disturbed Logan, waking up soaked in sweat after having nightmares where reality becomes made out of thorns, spending hours in lotus position retracting and ejecting his claws.
It does tie up with Weapon X though, so lets see how it's done.
I think it could be really good. The über nerds freaking out over the "The" in the title are hilarious btw
 

ark123

New member
Feb 19, 2009
485
0
0
DiMono said:
I think a second Wolverine movie lines up as unnecessary, to be honest. They've already done a Wolverine origins movie, and now they want to do a second one for some reason. I can't tell you how much I'm looking forward to movie fans rebelling over the almost complete lack of original ideas coming out of Hollywood.
I think most Wolverine fans were expecting something at least as good as Batman Begins, but instead we got Batman Forever, so we'll welcome anything with the character that ignores the existence of that abomination.
 

ComicsAreWeird

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,007
0
0
i´m not betting any money on the next movie. Gavin hood also was a decent filmaker and the first movie was awful. if studio execs stay away from the film, it might be good. otherwise,it will be as shitty as the first one.
 

Sean Strife

New member
Jan 29, 2010
413
0
0
Believe it or not, I remember reading somewhere that Aronofsky was actually going to tackle Batman and basically do what Nolan's doing with the franchise now.

With that said, I have faith in the project. I loved The Wrestler, Requiem for a Dream is one of my favorite movies, so this could actually be really good.

Also, I agree that Rourke would make for a perfect Wolverine.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Isn't a Wolverine movie without explosions and slicing things kind of like a porn movie without sex?

I kid. Well, sort of. I hope this is good, though.
 

mythgraven

No One Is Special
Mar 9, 2010
203
0
0
Are we seriously watching/listening to this?

The first Wolverine movie was "ok". It was sorta lame, in some ways, but it was the first live action Wolverine movie.

They came up with a second Wolverine movie, and introduced some new characters. This was also pretty lame, and in alot of ways, more-so. It was still acceptable, but had neither the newness nor alot of quality to it.

A third Wolverine movie was dreamed up, that tore everything to utter bollocks. The main Wolverine rival was killed, (boo) the main Wolverine teacher was killed, (boo) the Wolverine sequeeze was killed, (boo) the main Wolverine villain was de-powered, (boo) and the entire thing was basically a pretty poor film.

A fourth (?!) Wolverine movie came out, and it was pretty much alot of blather and "intrigue" as we tried to figure out what was "going on". We got to see even more of Wolverine's "backstory that everyone already knows" and I was again disappointed.

Now a fifth. Gah. Spare me.

Whiskey Echo!!
Mythgraven