News » Gavin Hood Talks Wolverine; Possible Sequel

Gavin Hood Talks Wolverine; Possible Sequel

With X-Men Origins: Wolverine on DVD, we caught up with the director for a chat.



South African Gavin Hood directed the Oscar-winning Tsotsi but has also knocked about Hollywood, acted in over a dozen movies and, following his political thriller Rendition, got the nod to helm the blockbuster X-Men Origins: Wolverine . Though the film drew mixed reviews, its box office has been enough to set in motion plans for a sequel. Recently we caught up with Hood to ask him about it, and share his thoughts on working with Hugh Jackman, comic book movies, and his admiration for fellow countryman Neill Blomkamp.


Will you be directing Wolverine 2?

I have no idea. All that's happened at the moment is that the studio has just commissioned the script for Wolverine 2 to be written. Whether that film will ever get made will depend on so many factors -- whether the studio likes the script, whether they find a director who responds to the script. Might that be me? Sure, I'd be extremely interested and thrilled if they were to send it to me.

How did you try to bring an extra dimension to a comic book movie?

In the original script they were not half brothers. There was some resistance to that, because in the world of the comics there's only a small suggestion in one particular comic that Victor Creed and Wolverine may well be half brothers. I just gravitated to that. Just having one good guy versus bad guy, with no emotional connection just felt like "Whoa -- you'll have nothing but punching and kicking". That was a way to build up the emotional power of the film. I thought Liev Schreiber did a phenomenal job. I'm very pleased that on the Blu-ray disc there's a particular scene that I was attached to that didn't make it into the movie. I say that without saying "It should have!" I think it probably should have been in the movie, but I understood the argument against it, and at the time there was much to-ing and fro-ing about it. It's a great thing to be able to put that sort of scene on the Blu-ray and let people think of other themes and idea that were in my mind when we made that scene.

How hard is it to get Hugh Jackman naked?

Well one of things we knew going into the film was that Hugh Jackman was going to have to do a certain amount of nudity in the film. Hugh will tell you how he wanted to be like De Niro in Cape Fear. I was like "Mate, you're going to be naked -- you better buff up". [laughs] Honestly though, I've never seen someone eat so much chicken steak and fish and lettuce for so long without throwing up. It was unbelievable. Seven meals a day of protein and a little bit of salad. No CGI on that body. Except for the claws.



You're from South Africa; so is Neill Blomkamp. Is this some kind of mini South African sci-fi renaissance? Have you spoken to Neill about District 9 ?

We have spoken because I had to tell him what a phenomenal job he did. I sat there in the cinema -- and probably it was a great deal of patriotic pride -- but I thought, here was something so fresh and so out there, yet so emotionally powerful. It was just so fantastic to see the originality of the piece.

From a South African perspective, did you find it true to its core?

Yeah. Scarily so. I know those characters. Those [adopts a funny Afrikaans accent] very well meaning policemen, who think they are being very nice to you who, but are completely on the side of authority and they're patronising you to death. Yeah. We grew up around those guys. Scary.

Which films inspire you?

David Lean, Lawrence of Arabia. I don't know why I say that, but epic, character-driven. I don't know that it's necessarily about genre -- I think in every genre there are films that do what they do really well. When you're looking at film, I don't think one should necessarily compare a drama with a sci-fi, except to the extent that there should be a good drama within the sci-fi, presumably. Within every genre there's a high point of that genre. I just find that fascinating -- that's why I loved District 9 , because it brought such a fresh perspective to that genre.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine is out now on DVD and Blu-ray.

Brendan D.

Brendan D. on 10-14-2009 11:09 PM

Wolverine sucked. And worse, a ten year old could have made it better. However, I don't think it was this Gavin Hood fella's fault. Whats with the silly over inflated story!?! It was call Origins WOLVERINE not Wolverine and a bunch of other schmos. Really. Why wasn't it just the established, well loved story we all know and were dying to see? BLEW IT! like Spider man 3-blew it.

Don't Tase Me Bro

Don't Tase Me Bro on 10-15-2009 12:34 AM

I'll take a Wolverine sequel any day over another Fantastic 4 sequel.

djcloudy

djcloudy on 10-15-2009 12:46 AM

why dont they swap? Let Neill Blomkamp direct Wolverine 2... n yeah i would love to see the story get out of origins and go into japan.

SolidChamp

SolidChamp on 10-15-2009 01:10 AM

I'd like to hear his thoughts on why Wolverine sucked...this interview is lame. I always want a director to own up to making a mediocre mess, like Raimi did with Spider-man 3, and explain what they felt went wrong. At least acknowledge that you cheated us out of a good Wolverine flick.

screwhead100

screwhead100 on 10-15-2009 04:54 AM

i agree with that feller >>> SolidChamp

Gordon Franklin Terry Sr

Gordon Franklin Terry Sr on 10-15-2009 06:21 AM

the bluddy word isn't "possible;"

THE BLUDDY WORD'S The "INEVITABLE" sequel or prequel or whatever
silly

Looselycult

Looselycult on 10-15-2009 06:31 AM

Although I do agree "Origins" was a mess it was still better than that hack Ratner's abomination X3. The best way to redeem "Origins" is to go to Japan and adapt Claremont and Miller's limited series. If this is done with honor and respect for the source material all will be forgiven.

Kami no Shi

Kami no Shi on 10-15-2009 08:50 AM

Ratner had no choice ,they threw a script at him and told him to direct it ,

He didn`t even come close to the freedom singer had .

Goatmeal

Goatmeal on 10-15-2009 11:16 AM

He didn't. X3 was virtually all Tom Rothman. Ratner's been receiving too much unwarranted hate for the film when most of it should be directed at Rothman (like hate for use of sentinals in the films). The film had multiple endings (as seen on the dvd extras) mainly due to fact that Ratner and Fox were constantly clashing on the film's direction (the ending where Rogue tells Bobby that she couldn't take the cure shot was Ratner's original). Ratner even tried to release an uncut extended version of TLS in early 2007 (which was said to have a runtime of over 140minutes) and Fox voided it. Probably because they didn't want people to see how sh*t their version actually was compared to Ratner's.

Trust me, it's easy to point the finger at Ratner or Hood as the ones at fault, but they aren't the enemies here. Fox is.

KJ Cassidy

KJ Cassidy on 10-15-2009 07:50 AM

I doubt any of you jerk'offs have even read the wolverine origins comic book, it wen't well with the story and they gave it the classic marvel touch. You guys are stupid as hell to judge a movie like this when theres movies like the marine out there.

Kami no Shi

Kami no Shi on 10-15-2009 08:53 AM

Yes ,I ve read the wolverine origin books ,and the movie given to us ( if you want to call it that .) was plotholed mess and the memoery erasing bullet come on ,what a F@cking joke.

dj Mark

dj Mark on 10-15-2009 10:29 AM

And who are you to judge The Marine when there are movies like Alone in the Dark out there?

See, we can do this all day.

King Thor

King Thor on 10-15-2009 10:41 AM

Kurt n Ethan u idiot this movie was terrible.

do you even realize how awesome a wolverine movie COULD HAVE BEEN if they just focused on Wolverine and Sabretooth? i'm just picturing blood and grittiness in the snows of canada.

Corwin S.

Corwin S. on 10-15-2009 10:57 AM

I hated this movie when I watched the leaked bootleg. However, once I watched it on Blu Ray it was much better. I'd suggest everyone the same.

Hamboner

Hamboner on 10-15-2009 11:11 AM

Poor fella... he got railroaded by Fox into shooting a film he had very little control over. He delivers a monster hit for them, and he still isn't even guaranteed the right to direct the second.

They'll probably not let him direct the next Wolverine sequel in order to appease fans who thought this movie sucked. But no matter who directs it, the sequel won't be any better if it is thrown together via committee the way this one was.

I understand studios need tentpoles that make lots of money... but this whole X-men franchise has been soul-crushing for the last 4 years.

lordmanji

lordmanji on 10-15-2009 11:14 AM

the failure of wolverine is ultimately the director's fault. he's the one that approves the overall look and feel of the movie. his reach spans all departments: script, production design, the film's "look," casting, editing, visual effects.

i thought wolverine played as a very broad, bordering on cartoony movie. the paragon of comic book movies is x-men and part 1 and 2 showed that you can have a comic book movie taken seriously. while wolverine wasn't exactly batman and robin, it fell on the same level as daredevil albeit with a bigger budget.

i wouldve liked to see a condensed thriller in the vein of the bourne identity series. wolverine is never going to be a mainstream character. to make him that way waters him down and the richness of his story. they should exploit the complexities and inherent darkness of his character and through that, by staying true to him do you excite the fanboys who then open up the movie to mass audiences. that, i think, is the overall failure of the movie in that it tried to appeal to everyone without taking advantage of what made wolverine so unique.

Goatmeal

Goatmeal on 10-15-2009 11:35 AM

"the failure of wolverine is ultimately the director's fault. he's the one that approves the overall look and feel of the movie. his reach spans all departments: script, production design, the film's "look," casting, editing, visual effects."

You haven't heard of Harvey Weinstein or Thomas Rothman then.

King Thor

King Thor on 10-15-2009 11:22 AM

I agree with Goatmeal, and I've been saying this for a while. FOX needs to burn.

As long as they hold the rights to any comic book characters...there will continue to be ****ty soul less terrible movies.

General Disarray

General Disarray on 10-15-2009 12:19 PM

I'm sorry, but if anyone out there really thinks that Wolverine had any redeeming qualities then you need to stop eating paint chips. It was like they were trying to make everything about it terrible just to **** with us. It is easily one of the wost comic adaptations I have ever seen, right up there with Catwoman - and no, it doesn't get a free pass just because it is Wolverine! Everything about it screams amatuer hour, like there where a bunch of Hollywood fatcats sitting in a board room some where placing bets on how ****ty they could make the movie but people would still see it.

Rockslide

Rockslide on 10-15-2009 12:32 PM

I'm not saying he has to run around in yellow spandex, but let's stick a little closer to the source material. This was just way out there, and yes I have read the Origins comics. The movie was about 10% true to them with the other 90% just made up and totally ridiculous. This movie could have been the original Origin set and been good just with that, all in the late 1800's.

CFM

CFM on 10-15-2009 12:51 PM

Change? Change??? You must be joking.

If W:O made a nice profit, then why would FOX consider changing a profitable formula for the sequel?

If the public keeps buying it, then the studio keeps making it. "Change" would be risking millions. No chance. No change.

FOX is a business. They read accountants' bottom lines, not rt's forums.

We all can beg and plead all we want. Reading each others posts and nodding our collective heads is as far as it'll go.

Until the public stops buying it, the studio will continue to make it. Crap.

ColinTheCimmerian

ColinTheCimmerian on 10-17-2009 10:43 AM

A fair point, CFM. As long as their movies are successful, Fox won't change their approach. On the bright side though, profitability has gone down with the last two movies, which means the general audience is responding to the drop-off in quality, which I find encouraging. Not everyone is just mindlessly going out to see whatever is advertised the most.

If we do a quick examination of the production budgets and domestic and worldwide grosses of each of the four X-men movies:

X-men Budget: 75mil Domestic: 157mil Worldwide: 296mil
X-men 2 Budget: 110mil Domestic: 214mil Worldwide: 407mil
X-men 3 Budget: 210mil Domestic: 234mil Worldwide: 459mil
Wolvie: Budget: 150mil Domestic: 179mil Worldwide: 373mil

we see that the first two were made on a relatively sparse budget and were extremely profitable. But the third cost close to triple what the first did and almost double what the second did yet didn't fare much better than X2. When you factor in increased ticket prices, I doubt X3 sold many more tickets than X2, maybe not even as many. That right there tells me that the audience did indeed respond negatively to the drop-off in quality. I'm guessing Fox picked up on that too, which is why they opted to reduce the budget a bit for the next entry and try for a smaller-scale spin-off. Percentage-wise, Wolverine may have fared slightly better than X3 when it comes to profitability, but if you look at its gross box office take, it fell off considerably from X3, another sign that the audience is either a) losing interest in the franchise (possibly due to disappointment in X3) and so didn't bother seeing Wolverine, or b) just flat-out didn't like Wolverine much and so didn't bother to see it multiple times or spread the good word like they did for X1 or X2. I think it's worth noting that despite having double the budget, an established franchise setting the table for it, and 9 years of increased ticket prices, Wolverine still didn't beat X1 by all that much.

The point is, this series isn't the financial juggernaut it used to be. I'm not naive enough to think Fox will suddenly start making them properly again, but I do think there's hope that Fox may eventually just give up on the franchise as profit margins continue to fall. At that point, best case scenario is they'll let the film rights lapse and revert back to Marvel/Disney. But even if that doesn't happen, they'll at least let the series sit a while and eventually start fresh with a reboot, hopefully getting back on track in the process.

Alexson Philip

Alexson Philip on 10-15-2009 01:22 PM

i loved xmen origins wolverine it was fukin amazing! de best action film i have ever seen.

TragicVillain

TragicVillain on 10-15-2009 01:50 PM

I like the inclusion of "Except for the claws." after the talk of no CGI on Hugh Jackman's appearance. I don't know about the rest of you, but I read that as a dig at the craptacular CGI used there. It would be nice to know Gavin recognizes how bad the CGI was.

GreenBastard

GreenBastard on 10-15-2009 03:24 PM

Lame.

Lord Naseby

Lord Naseby on 10-16-2009 07:22 AM

Hey I have an Idea!!! how about people stop making sequels to anything unless it is the next in a book series or they haven't finished the story!!!! Hollywood would make a kajillion more dollars if they came up with something new and original like PIXAR ROUTINELY DOES!!! a pixar film is going to win Best Picture one of these days because they are the only studio who always does something good!!! (except cars i hated cars) STOP MAKING POINTLESS SEQUELS!!!!!!!!!

What's Hot On RT

RT on DVD & Blu-Ray
RT on DVD & Blu-Ray

Red Tails, This Means War

24 Frames
24 Frames

Pictures: Wes Anderson films

Amazing Spider-Man
Amazing Spider-Man

Video: Your friendly four minute preview

Anchorman 2
Anchorman 2

Trailer: The legend continues!

Help | About | Jobs | Newsletter | Critics Submission | API | Licensing | Mobile