When Warner metformin 1000 mg tab Brothers offered Zack Snyder the director’s chair for the upcoming Superman: Man of Steel, it seemed like he was on top of the world. But certain developments have led some to wonder just how enviable Snyder’s lot is.
The big question has to do with Xerxes. Xerxes is the prequel to 300, Snyder’s breakout film. The plan has been for Snyder to write and direct Xerxes, based off of Frank Miller’s graphic novel. As of last summer, Snyder was said to be in the process of writing it.
So why did Warner Bros. just give the gig to Guy Ritchie?
Vulture is reporting that the Snatch and Sherlock Holmes helmer has just been offered to direct the project, which would presumably still shoot based off of Snyder’s script. Now this could very well be a matter of simple studio philosophy: why make two movies in a row when you could make them at the same time? With Snyder working away on Superman, it would be unlikely he’d be able to seriously return to Xerxes until after the Man of Steel was shot and cut.
But 300 came out five years ago, and I doubt that delaying the sequel another year will throw us into a state of national panic. Then again, 300 has made the studio a lot of money, as Xerxes likely will too. That they would be eager to get the film produced as quickly as possible makes sense.
/Film is also pointing to claims that the script’s third act is either in grave disrepair, or simply non-existent. But my question is: what the hell does that have to do with Snyder? David Goyer is writing the script for Superman. Not having a third act is a problem, to be sure, but I can’t see it making Snyder’s role in preproduction that much more difficult than it already is.
The other point of contention comes from rumors that Snyder’s in-the-can Sucker Punch is testing poorly. Well, based on the trailer, I can safely say that the movie looks bizarre and highly original. So of course it isn’t testing well. Zack Snyder’s last two films, 2009′s over-hyped Watchmen and last year’s weird animated owl movie, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole, both failed to make much of a splash at the box office. If there’s any truth to the rumors, then Sucker Punch seems on track to suffer a similar fate.
If that is the case, and Snyder has been taken off Xerxes because Sucker Punch looks like yet another Zack Snyder stinker, then my question is: why did they give him Superman in the first place? The guy has a distinct visual style and flair for cinematic storytelling. But he also has only four flicks under his belt, two of which were verifiable flops. If Warner Bros. was going to lose faith in Snyder, it surprises me that it would take them so long.
It’s likely that Snyder will make a statement through his reps soon, reassuring the public that he had been aware of Warner’s plan to offer Xerxes to Ritchie before any deal was made (if any deal does get made) and that he had given Ritchie his blessing to make the film. We’ll just have to wait and see. Right now, Snyder’s career depends on two things: How Sucker Punch fares at the box office, and whether the reported third-act problems in Superman are indicative of greater turmoil. The last thing the studio needs is their franchise reboot being compared to the Broadway train-wreck-in-progress, Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. But if and when such an analogy becomes applicable, you can bet I’ll be there eagerly casting the first stone.
Follow us on Twitter @take148, and yours truly @35mmofheaven.
