Can this be true? It comes from Star Magazine (via iWon), so chances are a solid 50-50, but is Jake Gyllenhaal the final answer as to who will next don the most famous of all superhero tights and a big red S? Does Toby Maguire’s almost-replacement as Peter Parker have enough to masquerade himself with glasses and become Clark Kent? I like Gyllenhaal, but this casting, if it’s true, seems a little off to me.
The saga of this Superman film is long and not very exciting. Numerous scripts (including a decent one by Kevin Smith), a revolving door of directors finally settling on (sigh) McG, and a lead role that has been rumored to be every young actor who a major studio could potentially consider as carrying a franchise on his back. I seem to remember reading a while ago that many actors were turning down the role because Warner Bros. wanted a multi-picture/multi-year commitment up front, and apparently a somewhat strict and restrictive one giving various sequels precedence over any other work. Even the terrible Paul Walker, once a supposed shoo-in for the role, reportedly turned down the role because of these potential restrictions and typecasting possibilites. Walker would have been awful (as always), as would have been Ashton Kutcher, so I guess we should be happy they’re choosing someone who can actually act, but Jake just feels wrong to me here. Hopefully, my gut will be wrong, rather than this casting, and if he does end up in the role, I suppose either Warner Bros. loosened their demands or Jake just really wants to be a superhero, and he doesn’t plan on missing out twice.
I’m a bit of nervous about how a McG influenced Metropolis will look. Since Charlie’s Angels, its sequel and Fastlane all have the same look (even The O.C. has a bit of his sunbleached, color saturated, music-video montage camera edits stylings), I’m both interested and terrified to see how he plans to reinvent this world. It seems to me like Warner Bros. did a better job mixing artistry with potential commerce in handing the Batman franchise to Christopher Nolan than in their blatant aspirations for a blockbuster from a new Superman.
Out of Focus 
I guess I’ll be ordering Superman from Netflix. I absolutely abhor McG. Get a real name! Why does this guy get to make movies? It makes no sense. He doesn’t make good ones. He makes bad ones. So I guess the lesson here is that being less than mediocre is the pathway to success (learned from our dear president, I suppose).
As for Gyllenhaal, he’s a good actor but the Man of Steel? I don’t think so. But it just goes to show that McG has no idea what he’s doing. You need someone who is somehow larger than life and heroic looking. Why is there a need to make Superman an everyman? Jake would make a good Jimmy Olsen. Superman needs to be bigger somehow. Christopher Reeves was a Superman. Yuo bought him in the role. You could almost say the same for Dean Cain, but not quite since the show was just awful (I won’t even bring up Smallville except to say Clark Kent, as represented therein, is apparently incapable of human-like emotions…Kryptonians must communicate via blank stares).
Before they make another Superman movie, maybe they should pick up a Superman comic book. Look inside. Get a good point of comparison.
LikeLike
Agreed, both on the comic book observation and the casting. Jake Gyllenhaal is entirely too doe-eyed and darling to make a convincing Man of Steel. Further, I don’t understand why it’s necessary to re-make Superman again, unless it’s to do something daring or interesting like, say, casting Crispin Glover as Superman.
Since they won’t, I’m only going to see it if they bring back Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor.
And yes, McG sucks shit through a twisty straw.
LikeLike